Cape Town Stadium: FIFA icon or albatross

Cape Town - An albatross around the necks of ratepayers, or a valuable and iconic asset? The Cape Town Stadium, running at an annual loss of about R40 million, was described as both during Tuesday’s full council meeting where it was agreed that the current management plan should be extended by a year to June 2016.

Councillors alluded to the recent Fifa corruption scandal during their debate on the stadium’s future, with Andre Fourie of the Freedom Front Plus saying that Fifa president Sepp Blatter took billions of rands out of the country, leaving Cape Town and other municipalities with massive bills for the stadiums that were built.

He said the consortium of Stade de France and the local SAIL Group pulled out if its management agreement with the city soon after the World Cup when it realised the stadium would never be filled to capacity.

Fourie said it was unlikely that the formation of a municipal entity to manage the stadium would be the panacea the city needed to make the facility financially viable.

“This albatross - despite the thousands that it cost the city to build - is costing ratepayers in unaffordable monthly operational and maintenance costs.”

Fourie said the only way the city could avoid any further financial loss was by selling the stadium to SA Rugby for R1.

“Acknowledge that the stadium was a mistake. Accept that you are not going to make it commercially viable without an anchor tenant. Cut your losses - and the albatross around the neck of Cape Town’s ratepayers - and offer the stadium to Newlands for R1.”

Demetrius Qually, of the DA, said that although the Fifa scandal had tarnished the World Cup legacy, the stadium remained a valuable and iconic asset.

There was also “justifiable” concern about the long-term viability of the stadium. However, the business plan being finalised, which included the lifting of restrictive environmental conditions, would make it sustainable.

“We are confident that the stadium and Green Point Urban Park can be both viable and financially sustainable,” said Qually.

Grant Haskin, of the African Christian Democratic Party, agreed that the management of the stadium had to continue without interruption while the business plan was being finalised.

But he said the city had been promising “stadium profitability” since 2009. “How then can one blame irate ratepayers for their calls to rather demolish the stadium instead of wasting their money? What was a proud moment in Cape Town’s history has become a furious embarrassment for the city and its people.”

Majidie Abrahams, of the ANC, argued that extension of the management arrangements without clarity on the business plan could put the city at risk of spending and losing money for another three years.

But mayor Patricia de Lille pointed out that the management plan had been extended to June 2016, and not 2018 as initially proposed, and included a condition that a progress report on the commercialisation of the precinct would be submitted to council in March next year.

Garreth Bloor, mayoral committee member for economic development, tourism and events, said the rezoning process was already under way. Demolition of the stadium was not an option, he said.

The city had been advised of 18 revenue streams that would generate a profit for the next 10 to 15 years.

This excluded any revenue that would come in from an anchor tenant.

He said the naming rights alone would secure between R5m and R10m in revenue for the city. The tabled revenue budget for the next financial year is R14m.

But Bloor allayed fears about the discrepancy between the stadium’s projected costs and income.

Although the tabled operating budget expenditure for 2015/2016 was R138m, limited commercial rights would bring this amount down to R34.2m. “The commercial rights process has already started. We will make it work and we will continue the (World Cup) legacy,” he said.

[like a mountain goat skipping through the diaspora with donations...]

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

Government is not concerned about it's citizens here is the proof.

“One should question a government’s willingness to deliver housing for the poor when it builds a white elephant for the rich,” says André du Plessis of Cape Town-based InternAfrica, which campaigns for sustainable housing.

- Financial Times London 08/07/2010

Naturally what followed was colluded stadia construction Cape Town cost R4,4 Billion and service delivery of toilets for 50,000 that remain locked up and maintained at R60 million cost per annum... and Blikkiesdorp

All I can say is #ITOLDYOUSO!

LONG AGO!

Toilets for 50,000 - Money woes for Cape stadium

Cape Town - Cape Town Stadium continues to be a massive financial drain on the City of Cape Town, and it doesn’t appear things will get better any time soon.

The stadium’s operational budget for the 2015/2016 financial year is a staggering R13 758 7954, while expected revenue is a just a tenth of that – R14 843 871.

A substantial portion of the stadium’s operating budget expenditure for the 2015/2016 financial year – more than R20 million – has already been allocated to salary related costs.

The bill is already nearly R6m higher than the expected revenue which is brought in by the hire or rental of portions of the stadium.

Running at a loss of more than R40m a year, the city is considering various commercial models that would make it financially viable.

However, this plan has not been finalised, and the city can’t afford to let the current management arrangement lapse. The temporary management arrangement, which was extended from June 2014, expires at the end of June.

In the absence of a long-term business plan that deals with staffing issues and commercial rights, the City of Cape Town has no option but to extend its current contracts and management plan for another year.

“The retention of the status quo will reduce any down time through the recruitment of a new team, thus reducing operational, infrastructural, safety and reputational risks,” said Lesley de Reuck, of the city’s tourism, events, and economic development directorate. The current staff was familiar with the stadium and the park, as well as their processes and standards.

“Events already booked for the 2015/2016 financial year require contractual fulfilment. These represent potential repeat clients and are critical revenue generators that must be nurtured. The facility cannot cease to operate on June 30, 2015,” said De Reuck.

In a report considered by the mayoral committee last week, De Reuck said a substantial portion of the stadium’s operating budget expenditure for the 2015/2016 financial year – R20 127 130 – had already been allocated to salary-related costs.

“The retention of the status quo will reduce any down time through the recruitment of a new team, thus reducing operational, infrastructural, safety and reputational risks.”

The current staff were familiar with the stadium and the park, as well as their processes and standards.The stadium has also been booked for events in the next financial year. “Current contractual and partnership agreements with event organisers must be honoured. Failure to do so may result in breach of contract and goodwill,” said De Reuck.

The team of external consultants appointed in 2011 to do a business modelling exercise on the stadium recommended that the land use and environmental conditions for the use of the stadium and its precinct should be changed to allow for commercial activity.

These processes are already under way and De Reuck said the submission of the formal application for amended land use planning conditions was “imminent”. The proposed amendments to the current environmental conditions were released for public comment last month.

He said both processes would be concluded by December, if there were no appeals.

Once these provisions have been granted, steps will be taken to release the Granger Bay Boulevard site into the property development market, he added.

Although the report called for a three-year extension of the management plan, until June 2018, Mayor Patricia de Lille amended the time frame, during Friday’s mayoral committee meeting, by just one year, to next June.

She also called for a progress report on the business plan to be submitted to the council by next March.

Also on the operational budget is a depreciation cost of more than R58m and repairs and maintenance costs of more than R192m. The total operating budget is more than R137m, but the expected revenue for the stadium for the next financial year is more than R148m. Most of this comes from the hire or rental of portions of the stadium.

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

Dilemma of Cape’s homeless

Cape Town - When Nomanindia Mfeketo was Cape Town mayor she made a commitment that within a year there would be no more children sleeping on the city’s streets.

That was in 2004 and, as she later acknowledged, the problem was a lot more complex than she had originally realised.

There have been a number of efforts since then to reduce the number of homeless people on the streets.

Before the World Cup in 2010, NGOs accused the city of rounding up street children and the homeless and dumping them at Blikkiesdorp near Delft. The city denies this, though, saying Blikkiesdorp was established as a Temporary Relocation Area in 2008 to house people who were evicted after invading N2 Gateway houses.

And last year there was a talk of the establishment of “community villages” outside the city centre where people could live and have access to skills training and drug rehabilitation programmes.

Greg Andrews, convener of the Street People’s Forum, said this proposal had since been canned.

The forum is a collective of several organisations working with street people in the city.

Andrews said the city’s “community village” idea was a perennial proposal that had surfaced in many guises over the last two decades.

“Even if such a community village were established, why would people want to go there? Would they be compelled against their will?

“On the other hand, perhaps it would be a really attractive proposition which someone on the streets would love to go to, in which case why would people leave once they have entered?”

Hassan Khan, chief executive of the Haven Night Shelter, believes the streets are no place for people to live.

“The streets should be a cold place, a place where you are hungry, so people come for help.”

But he says people are given permission to be there by politicians and some encouraged by NGOs who go out and give blankets and food to the poor.

“People are pre-programmed to help. They also pay someone just to be left alone.”

Not that he believes that poverty should be policed like the CCID with their private armies who force people to the edge of the CBD.

Khan said there were an increasing number of people coming to the streets, mainly adults.

“There are guys in their 50s from Welkom who have worked their whole lives in the Post Office and are virtually unemployable now.”

There is a large gay population, people who are not accepted by their families, and youngsters lured by the bright city lights.

“The important thing is how quickly a child on the street is identified and helped. The same with adults.”

Zara Nicholson, spokeswoman for mayor Patricia de Lille, said the City of Cape Town was the first city in the country to have adopted a policy for people living on the street.

“The city’s strategy is to reduce the number of people living on the street and to place them back with their families and communities of origin.”

Part of this reintegration effort included attempts to secure employment opportunities via the Expanded Public Works Programme.

Nicholson said that street people could not, however, be forced into accepting the city’s offers of assistance.

The City of Cape Town’s Reintegration Unit, launched in December, had successfully assisted 85 street people in its first three months of operation.

The city is also in the final phase of its Street People Survey which would include conducting a headcount of street people. The last comprehensive survey conducted by the city was in 2001 and there are estimates that there are around 7 000 transient people either living or begging on the street (across the whole city).

Councillor Suzette Little, the city’s mayoral committee member for social development and early childhood development announced recently that the city had nearly doubled its budget for its winter street people programme this year. The budget for the 2014 programme was R280 000, but this year R600 000 had been allocated.

Little said they also ran a number of programmes in communities most at risk to prevent more people migrating to the streets.

“These programmes are focused on issues in the home, truancy and substance abuse and to provide support to street people who are reintegrated into their communities to prevent a return to their former life.”

But Andrews doesn’t believe the city’s Street People Policy is actually effective.

“The central aim of its current policy boils down to the removal of people from the streets, though this is couched in gentle terms like ‘reintegration’ and ‘reunification’ so it’s quite palatable.”

But he explains that reunification or reintegration only worked if it was self-determined.

“Take for instance the typical example of someone who has come to the city centre desperate for work. Precious few opportunities exist and eventually he either is begging or parking cars, scrounging a pittance any way he can.

“Even if he never makes enough money to support his family, at least he feels he is not a burden to them – another mouth to feed, a body taking up precious space.

“But sometimes, he may be able to get a bag of groceries back home, maybe for someone’s birthday or for Christmas. Now the city’s Reintegration worker finally compels this man to go home.

“Imagine the shame of being escorted home by the larney from the welfare with nothing to support your family and them being told they must look after you. This is not sustainable.”

Andrews believes reintegration was only possible once the “40 percent unemployment and intractable brutal violence” that characterises daily life in the home communities that people on the streets run away from, are addressed.

“Furthermore, we need to address the bottleneck of over-full shelters, over-stretched services and inadequate social housing. Reintegration is meaningless when we have nothing to reintegrate a person into.”

Andrews says it would be refreshing if the city were to admit that people on the streets are not the problem and they’re not going away any time soon.

“The real problem is that 20 years into freedom, poverty is worse and it’s high time we stop trying to remove the poor from our well-to-do areas just because they make us feel uncomfortable or threaten our illusion of security.”

helen.bamford@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

BlikkiesDorp - The Zille legacy

Cape Town Stadium may cost another R60 million

Ratepayers are not done paying for the Cape Town Stadium just yet, because a draft environmental assessment report released for public comment reveals it could cost as much as R60 million to refurbish parts of the stadium to make it suitable for commercial activities.

The consultants working on the assessment, the Environmental Partnership, said this was an "approximate" cost that would depend on the stadium's full commercial potential being realised. With more limited specifications, the amount could be drastically reduced.

But the use of the stadium for office and retail space could bring in an annual revenue of R31m.

It has cost the City of Cape Town R4.4 billion to build the stadium for the 2010 World Cup, and the facility has been running at an annual loss of R39m since then.

Luke Stevens, spokesman for the Camps Bay Residents' and Ratepayers' Association (CBRRA), said: "Our greatest fear as ratepayers is that the city will throw significant amounts of good money - such as R60m - in speculative redevelopment to discover that even after the removal of the constraints to business activity, the stadium remains technically unprofitable."

Stevens said the association did not object to the commercialisation of the stadium precinct, but had "very little faith" in the business plan upon which the projected revenue streams were based.

The city had yet to adopt a business model for the stadium, and work on this was being done as a separate exercise, said the Environmental Partnership.

Stevens said this process "remains opaque and we continue to suspect, given the competencies of the International Risk Mitigation Consultants who compiled the business plan, that the hidden emphasis in the business plan's terms of reference was to find a way to dislodge Western Province Rugby from Newlands rather than to find real alternatives for Cape Town Stadium".

An estimated 20 000m2 of potential lettable space for offices, restaurants or retail outlets was available within the stadium structure. The proposed commercialisation of the precinct was limited to the stadium and would not infringe on the Urban Park.

The Environmental Partnership said the remainder of the shortfall would be made up from various revenue streams, such as the development of suites, commercial parking, advertising and the development of the Granger Bay Precinct.

The development of this precinct could bring in between R27m and R98m, depending on which proposal was accepted.

There was a separate environmental impact assessment under way for the Granger Bay area but the legislation was changed last December, and the proposed redevelopment was no longer a listed activity and therefore did not require an environmental authorisation. However, the development would still need land use and heritage approvals.

Given the ongoing operational and maintenance budget shortfalls for the stadium, the city needed to find a sustainable business model that would make the precinct commercially viable.

This could only be done if the existing environmental authorisation that restricted these activities was amended.

"It is anticipated that the income generated from commercial activities will assist in reducing the annual deficit of R39m incurred by the municipality and subsequently the ratepayers. From an economic point of view, the stadium's viability needs to be improved and municipal spending on this existing facility reduced," said the report.

The draft environmental report forms part of this process.

After feedback from the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, it was recommended that two rezoning proposals should be considered - general business and a split zoning, which would allow the South Forecourt to be used for general business subzone 1, while the remainder would be for subzone 7.

While both zones would allow for commercial activity that include retail, business or office space, places of worship, a multiple parking garage, a service station, places of entertainment or hotels, the South Forecourt would have a height restriction and floor space restrictions.

Additional use rights include an adult shop subject to certain provisions.

The split-zoning was the preferred alternative, as it would be more likely to protect the integrity of the South Forecourt while allowing this portion of the precinct to become more functional.

Some of the major impacts identified in the report include the additional lighting at the stadium, potential traffic impact on event days, and future development risks associated with the South Forecourt.

The report also recommended conditions of approval, such as the use of signals on the Green Point traffic circle to cope with the increased traffic and a heritage assessment of any development on the South Forecourt.

This area of the stadium must be used as a functional open space, said the Environmental Partnership. This condition was welcomed by CBRRA. "We stress that open space is vital to the promotion of a healthy and productive society. These spaces are not fallow, wasted areas," said Stevens.

The findings of the draft environmental impact report will be available at an open meeting at the stadium on April 21, from 4pm until 8pm, with a presentation starting at 6pm.

- IOLProperty

Cape Town goes after bid-rigging money

Cape Town - The City of Cape Town is claiming R400 million in damages from construction companies involved in bid rigging for construction of Cape Town Stadium, making it the first municipality to attempt ty to recoup costs.

“Bid rigging is the most serious contravention of the Competition Act and is designed to subvert competitive tender processes, leading to increased costs,” said mayor Patricia de Lille during her address at Wednesday’s final council meeting for the year.

“The damages suffered were at the expense of the public whose rights we are duty bound to protect.”

The Competition Commission has referred the case of collusive tendering for the 2010 World Cup stadiums against WBHO Construction, Group Five Construction, Stefanutti Stocks Holdings and Basil Read to the Competition Tribunal. Murray & Roberts was granted some leniency.

These companies, excluding Murray & Roberts, did not settle the case as part of the general construction fast-track settlement process, which started in 2011.

The commission’s investigation found evidence of collusion when bidding for the construction of stadiums by allocating tenders among themselves and agreeing on their profit margins.

Among the alleged deals was that the tender for Cape Town Stadium would be given to Murray & Roberts in a joint venture with WBHO.

“I have instructed the city’s attorneys to issue summons for the recovery of the damages suffered and they will be attending to the formalities over the next few days,” De Lille said.

The city would also lay criminal charges.

ACDP caucus leader Grant Haskin threw cold water on the announcement: “How do we believe what you are saying when the companies involved keep getting contracts from the city?”

In October, Haskin asked the mayor which of these contractors were awarded contracts after 2010. De Lille said in her written reply that R313m was paid to Group Five for four contracts after 2011, including two MyCiTi contracts.

Group Five Construction was awarded a R70 662 543 contract for Phase 1B and the N2 phases of the MyCiTi service in 2012. It was also awarded a contract for R87 269 708 for construction of the inner-city feeder bus stops.

“This shows that the DA government’s prior commitment had been unilaterally ignored and, rather, that they had been rewarded with even more contracts,” said Haskin.

Asked why the city had continued to do business with this company, De Lille said: “Watch this space.”

She added that the construction companies had paid fines after the commission’s findings. “We had to wait for the process to run its course (before taking further action).”

She later quipped to the ANC, on the other side of the House: “You must be careful, there are a lot of comrades in those companies.”

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

Zuma Nkandla probe centralised – police

Cape Town - Charges of corruption laid against President Jacob Zuma at various police stations have been centralised and are being investigated nationally, police spokesperson Solomon Makgale said on Monday.

"The charges were laid by opposition party members at many police stations," Makgale said.

"It was centralised at national office."

Makgale would not elaborate on details of the investigation, but suggested police have not brought official charges against Zuma.

"We are not even talking charges as yet," said Makgale.

"Remember, all the political parties, they went into the charge offices and said they wanted us to investigate corruption. They handed the public protector's report to the charge office."

No further information

DA parliamentary leader Mmusi Maimane laid several charges against Zuma in March relating to upgrades to Zuma's private Nkandla homestead in KwaZulu-Natal.

In a written reply to a parliamentary question by Maimane on Friday, Police Minister Nathi Nhleko said the investigation was under way.

"The investigation in this regard has been initiated and no further information can be disclosed at this juncture as the matter is still sub judice," said Nhleko in the reply.

"Suffice to say that all processes have been followed."

Maimane had wanted to know whether the case was being investigated, who the investigating officers were and the timelines for the probe.

Nhleko would not give more information.

Maimane laid the charges shortly after the release of Public Protector Thuli Madonsela's final report on the Nkandla upgrades.

In her report, Madonsela found Zuma "unduly benefited from the enormous capital investment" in the Nkandla upgrades, totalling R246m.

- SAPA

Cape’s R15.7m stadium upkeep plan

Cape Town - The City of Cape Town has set aside R15.7 million for “corrective and preventative” maintenance at Cape Town Stadium.

Garreth Bloor, the mayoral committee member for tourism, events and economic development, said: “The Cape Town Stadium has a maintenance strategy to ensure that the current structure, systems and facilities are maintained according to industry standards for structural elements. Such maintenance is essential to prevent potential larger maintenance costs in the future.”

The stadium has been running at an annual loss of R40m since Sail de France terminated its management contract with the city. The operating costs since 2009 are more than R400m.

The city is seeking to change zoning restrictions that will allow it to use the stadium precinct for commercial activities. This process is still under way, as well as a consideration of possible business plan models.

Talks with the South African Rugby Union about moving games from Newlands to the stadium are understood to be continuing.

The city invested R3m in this weekend’s Rugby Championship clash between the Springboks and the Wallabies, with the condition that “the support of this event will assist with current negotiations between the city and Western Province Rugby for future events to be held at the Cape Town Stadium”.

Bloor said the three tenders advertised for upgrades and replacements at the stadium were the “first tranche” of maintenance work. These included a tender for new lifts. The stadium currently has two operational lifts and because of the volume of people passing through the venue during events, an additional four lifts have to be installed.

The second tender was for the upgrade and replacement of the stadium’s turnstiles.

Bloor said the city wanted to replace the British service provider with a local company. Other information technology-related equipment would also be replaced in keeping with international best practice

“The stadium is currently within that five-year (turnaround) cycle and to maintain a good functioning facility, it is prudent to start the process now.”

- Cape Argus

Five plans to save Cape Town stadium

Cape Town - Five models are being considered to ease the financial woes of Cape Town Stadium, but they do not include either demolition or a casino.

Angry ratepayers described the plans for the stadium and its precinct as a “farce”, “smoke and mirrors” and a waste of ratepayers’ money.

The stadium generates between R12 million and R15m a year, but it costs the city and ratepayers R55m to keep it going.

There are two proposals to help the stadium pay its way: the commercialisation of the stadium and the development of Granger Bay Boulevard, an area beside the stadium fronting on to the road known as Granger Bay Boulevard.

But ratepayers have been told that demolition is not an option. Nor are there plans to ease the stadium’s financial woes with the building of a casino.

“The harsh reality is that this stadium is costing you and I as the ratepayers,” Geoff Underwood of Planning Partners told about 40 people who attended a meeting at the stadium.

“There is no proposal to put a casino in the stadium. If anybody comes up with any proposal, it would have to follow national law in terms of casino licensing,” Underwood said.

The meeting was the first of eight hearings to be held across the city about the background and draft scoping reports for the two developments.

Both sites will have to be rezoned for general business to allow for the commercial activity recommended by the business plan that was commissioned by the City.

The stadium has about 20 000m2 which could be used for commercial activities. There is also an opportunity to expand seating from 55 000 to 62 000. But the commercialisation of the stadium alone would not be enough to make it financially viable.

Granger Bay Boulevard has been earmarked for a mixed-use development that could include retail and office space, a sports science facility and a hotel.

According to the background and scoping document prepared for the city by The Environmental Partnership, all five alternatives for the development - which includes buildings ranging from 15 to 60m high - will have a significant impact on the area.

Underwood said the low-development model for Granger Bay would yield an additional income of R9m, and a high-development option with buildings at maximum height could yield up to R45m extra a year.

One of the most significant implications of the development is that the land will no longer be available for public use.

Heritage Western Cape has asked for an impact assessment to be considered. This must include an archeological study with particular reference to Fort Wynyard. The study should also look at the possible intrusion of the development into sightlines. The proposed development would also have implications for services such as water and sewer generation.

The report noted that the increase in commuters to the site “may potentially result in traffic congestion”.

However, Underwood was at pains to emphasise that no decision had been made yet on the “design forms or intensity” of the building that would go up at Granger Bay Boulevard.

Most of the 40 people at the meeting expressed concerns about the cost of running the stadium and the potential impact of these two developments. None of their questions were answered, however, as the consultants insisted that their comments would be noted for inclusion in the next report. One participant called it a “smoke and mirrors” meeting.

A member of the Green Point Ratepayers’ Association was concerned that a noise assessment would not be done for the stadium.

“There could be a discotheque or a nightclub at the stadium. This could be a serious problem if it is allowed to operate at the current decibels allowed for concerts and sporting events.”

The association referred to the plans to develop Granger Bay Boulevard as “error in logic” on its website. “Their temptation is to plug the full financial hole created by the R40m gap between the stadium costs and stadium directed revenues by developing to the maximum possible potential on the adjoining site.”

The association also questioned the city’s focus on the stadium precinct for revenue, when the funds could come from new developments anywhere in the city.

Carmen du Toit, of The Environmental Partnership, said the issues raised would be taken forward, and there would an opportunity later to comment again.

The period for comment ends August 22.

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

Reports of CPT homeless 'work camps' alarming

The Cape Argus on Friday published a shocking exposé on a new City of Cape Town plan to rid the city centre of people who live and make a living on the streets. Anyone who refuses to voluntarily participate in these "community village" rehabilitation programmes would be forcibly placed there through the community courts system.

In the Argus, however, member of the city's mayoral committee (Mayco) for social development, Suzette Little, said that it was "proposed for community villages to complement existing street people programmes and services". In fact, the way the city is spinning the idea is, according to safety and security mayco member JP Smith, "part of a general move towards a more caring and supportive approach in dealing with street people" and as an "alternative to a 'law enforcement' approach". In other words, Little and Smith are claiming that this new programme is about love, care and rehabilitation, rather than discipline and punishment.

But that is not how homeless rights advocates and others see the programme, which was presented as a "done deal" to city improvement district (CID) representatives in a private meeting on the March 15 this year.

According to a source (who asked to remain anonymous because his/her organisation's funding comes through the city), Little presented the programme to the CIDs in a very different light. In the said meeting, she dispelled any semblance of compassion by asserting that "food or jobs cleaning streets or recycling attracts them [street people] to the city, so we must start cutting them off".

Showing a lack of understanding and empathy for people who live on the streets, Little apparently exclaimed: "Dis lekker op die straat, dis a free party. [It's nice on the streets, its a free party]." (It is not as if Little has never gotten paid for having a party of her own: she was infamously caught playing Solitaire during a 2013 budget vote.)

In other words, Little wants to use a reported R40-million budget allocation for helping street people to put an end to all support initiatives in the city centre. This includes soup kitchens, recycling initiatives and even the religious Straatwerk jobs programme. As a result, this would make it hard for them to live on the streets and a new "Street People's Reintegration Unit" would encourage them to "go home" (nevermind the inconvenient truth that most often their home is the street itself).

'Blocking the pavement'

But if people living on the street refuse to go – because the freedom of movement and right to refuse work is their dignified right as per the anti-slavery provision in the Constitution – the unit, with the help of law enforcement will build a dossier against them of minor by-law infractions, such as "blocking the pavement", and eventually use the community courts to force them into these rehabilitation villages.

The source claims that twice during the meeting, Little let slip the word "camp" and had to correct herself. According to the source, "winking at her executive director for social development Ivan Bromfield", Little reportedly said that "he'd be angry if she uses the wrong words".

Why is the word "camp" a big no-no? Simply because it immediately brings to mind war-time forced labour camps, Chinese re-education camps and even the horrifying concentration camp. (If one remembers, the English pioneered the concentration camp against Afrikaners and black South Africans during the Anglo-Boer War).

This account of the private meeting with CID representatives is so important precisely because Little and Smith assumed they were preaching to the converted. In a private meeting to the representatives, they felt that they could be candid about their true intentions while assuming they generally already agreed with and actively participated in the criminalisation of street people.

This is not the first time the municipality has been caught trying to "cleanse" the city centre of street people. Smith, in fact, was instrumental in the winter readiness plan: the arrest and forced removal of hundreds of street people from around Cape Town Stadium in anticipation for the 2010 World Cup.

What is becoming more clear about this initiative is that rather than being caring and supportive, the city's plan is to use by-laws to strip away the little dignity this vulnerable section of the population has left. 

It does not matter how rehabilitative these so-called villages will be – if the individual is not going there of his/her own free will, then it cannot be effective. By forcing street people into these villages, they are effectively incarcerating them for not having a roof over their head.

These villages are nothing more than glorified prisons a la the controversial Chinese Detox Centres; they are essentially presentable and unoffensive versions of Nazi forced-labour camps.

This time, however, its not Jews or homosexuals or communists that fascism has deemed a scapegoat for society's ills. Instead, it is merely street people whose freedom and dignity in this country don't count because their only home blocks a pavement in front of a nightclub and their "unsavoury" form of livelihood scares away the tourists.

- M&G

Desperation and fear way of life for people in Delft

Cape Town - It’s just past midday and, as the wind sweeps loose sand and stones across a dilapidated park, a teenager stands among roaming toddlers waiting for her little sister to swoop down the slide into her arms.

It may seem like an ordinary day, but for the 16-year-old it’s another spent worrying about whether, in life, there will be a safe landing for her.

It’s been 20 years since the advent of South Africa’s hard-won democracy, but the teenager doesn’t even go to school – because none of the schools near her home has space.

“We moved to the camp from Woodstock because the rent became too high,” says the girl, who has been living in Blikkiesdorp for two years.

“I would have been in Grade 8 and it’s not nice for me, because I’m missing out on schoolwork,” she adds, staring at the ground.

At the beginning of the month, the girl attended night school at Leiden High, but left because the coursework was at a Grade 11 level.

Now she does household chores and helps her mother look after her four siblings and her sister’s 11-month-old baby.

“For me, it was better living in Woodstock than here. Here there are shootings, rapes, and they rob people, even children.”

Her mother, she said, agreed it was no place to raise a child, and that her brothers had become badly behaved.

“I see all the bad things happening around me in this place, and children are sometimes neglected by their parents.”

Her dream was to become a social worker.

In Delft’s Section 9, three teenage girls in Grade 8 at Simunye High tell a similar story.

“We’re not safe. A week ago, a three-year-old was raped down there,” said one, pointing to an area down the road.

The trio said pupils were robbed by gangs.

“Lots of children drop out and end up doing drugs like dagga and tik,” said another.

To keep busy after school, they play netball or soccer at a nearby community hall, but the girls said more facilities were desperately needed to keep children off the streets.

Parks were ruined by people who stole the equipment to sell as scrap.

They hoped to see a clean-up of the area, housing, more jobs, and bursaries for young people.

But at the top of their personal wish lists was finding a home away from Delft.

Faced with housing backlogs, rising crime, social ills and a spate of child rapes, Delft’s ballooning population is demanding better service delivery. The damage caused by residents during protests bears testimony to their frustration.

Rows over housing allocations also keep many Delft communities in limbo.

Andrew Badenhorst, 50, who moved from Belhar six years ago, said residents had no clue to whom the land in Blikkiesdorp belonged.

He said the crime rate was rocketing with a constant influx of people. He estimated that 15,000 people lived in Blikkiesdorp, which had about 2,000 structures.

Children, who accounted for most of the population, were most at risk.

“Many of them don’t go to school and end up abusing alcohol and drugs, and get lured into the gangs. Kids sell their bodies for R20 for tik.”

Some people desperate for money sold their structures.

“Then they go back to the street. Our biggest concern used to be housing, but we get discriminated against because backyard dwellers and people from settlements like Freedom Farm and Malawi Camp are getting preference.

“As we are stuck here, at least help us to fight the high crime rate. Must more people die before the city wakes up?”

A traffic light in Symphony Way, torched during a housing protest the previous night, marks a smaller informal settlement named Tsunami.

Resident Thobeka Dyasi, 29, said she was even prepared to continue living in a shack – “away from here”.

Danger lurked around every corner in Tsunami.

“We don’t have toilets, and it’s not safe going to the bushes, because you can get raped or robbed. I’m even scared now just having my phone on me here in the open,” Dyasi said.

She worked in the area as a carer and the only advantage to living in Delft was saving on travelling costs.

With winter approaching, there is the fear that rain will exacerbate their problems.

Of most concern was that the municipality wanted to evict them, Dyasi said. “One official even threatened us and said they would force us out by bulldozing our shacks. We’re so scared, as we don’t know where we will go.”

Blikkiesdorp is in ward 106, which includes parts of Delft South, Leiden, The Hague and Cape Town International Airport. The 2011 city census found Delft’s population was 152 030.

“Delft is like a dumping site. Blikkiesdorp and Tsunami’s people were dumped here, and I don’t think the city’s going to give them housing any time soon because it is looking at backyard dwellers. The growing number of people also fuels crime,” said Reginald Maart, chairman of the Delft Community Policing Forum.

The community’s frustrations were “high”, and with the dire socio-economic situation, more input was needed from government departments to uplift the area and combat crime.

“They need to look at housing for the poor, as there’s no space for children to play. We have six policing sectors, but only one vehicle for each. Resources are poor.”

Maart has written to Western Cape police commissioner Lieutenant-General Arno Lamoer asking him to deploy more police and vehicles.

On the question of child safety, he said: “From the time school closes until the parents come home from work, children can be seen wandering the streets, and that’s when drug-lords get hold of the kids and build relationships with them, luring them into a life of crime.”

Delft needed “drastic change” to create a safer environment, Maart said.

“When we have community meetings, you often don’t see ward councillors, or they are there for only a few minutes, then leave. Social workers are not visible enough.”

Ward 106 councillor Khayalethu Makeleni said councillors did not receive invitations to these “alleged” meetings, and did not have a relationship with the community policing forum.

He agreed the community was “angry” and felt police did not have effective child protection plans.

Other problems Makeleni listed were high unemployment, alcohol abuse and conflict over housing allocations.

In working through housing lists to approve residents for the Delft Integrated Housing Project, in which 2 407 homes are to be built, it had often been found that false information had been given, he said.

“Some backyarders speak of being in Delft since 1981, but our argument is that Delft was not even here at that time.”

Some people living in the free homes provided as part of the controversial N2 Gateway housing project wanted to be included in the new development because they did not regard their “alternative” structures as proper houses.

The Gateway project has delivered more than 14 000 free homes but, after nearly nine years, has yet to be completed.

- Weekend Argus

2010 Stadium all over again - housing ‘football’

Cape Town - Western Cape premier Helen Zille accused the ANC on Friday of playing “political football” with housing in the province.

“They have repeatedly claimed that when they were in government in the province 'they built 16,000 houses per year, while the Democratic Alliance has only been able to build 10,000 houses per year',” she said during her state-of-the-province address in Cape Town.

She said she was sceptical of the African National Congress's claims and asked her department's forensic investigation unit (FIU) to do an audit on the source of this data, namely the 2008/9 annual local government and housing report produced under the ANC administration.

She said the report claimed the ANC completed 15 717 houses during that period but that the FIU found this claim could not be verified.

“For a start, the ANC's thumb-suck figure includes programmes that had nothing to do with building and delivering housing units,” Zille claimed.

“And it also shows that the ANC simply shifted the deadline, and counted units that had not been completed by the end of the financial year.”

The premier alleged the party “got away” with this conduct because the auditor general (AG) was not verifying statistics at that stage by actually counting the finalised housing total by the cut-off date.

She said the AG had noted in the report that the evidence provided to support the department's performance was “materially inconsistent” in a number of instances with the reported performance.

Opposition MPLs jeered at Zille's remarks and claimed her administration had not even managed to build as many as 10 000 houses per year.

Leader of the opposition in the legislature Lynne Brown criticised the FIU by shouting: “How much did that cost?”

Zille continued after order had been called.

“That is AG speak for 'you were talking nonsense'... In short, their claim to have built 16 000 houses each year is without foundation.

“I would use stronger terms than this but it would probably be unparliamentary, Mr Speaker.”

- Sapa

R52m cut from Cape Town stadium bill

Cape Town - An “amicable” settlement has been reached between the City of Cape Town and the professional team appointed to design and build Cape Town Stadium, with the city paying R52 million less on the contracted amount of R637m.

But mayor Patricia de Lille may have to explain why she released a statement about the agreement, just hours after the matter was discussed confidentially during a closed session of Wednesday’s council meeting.

The details of the settlement agreement were placed on the “green” agenda, meaning that it was a confidential matter that could not be discussed with the media or the public present.

Speaker Dirk Smit moved the item to the start of the meeting and the public and media galleries were asked to leave the chamber for almost half an hour so that councillors could deal with the matter.

However, just a few hours later, the mayor’s spokesperson released a media statement with details of the settlement agreement.

ANC councillor Tony Ehrenreich, speaking from the council chamber, said the mayor had violated council rules by putting a confidential matter into the public domain, via the media.

“This is an official complaint in terms of the rules of the House. The mayor is out of order.”

He said later in a statement that the mayor had pushed the item through council to hide something.

“This supposed confidential agreement between the city and the professional services hides many irregularities, which includes a real danger that the professional services company had also been guilty of collusion - and this must be investigated.

“By releasing confidential information to the media, the mayor’s conduct is also in violation of the rules of council. The extent of her public statement is clearly an attempt at damage control for inappropriate behaviour of the City of Cape Town, with professional services.”

Smit said he could not decide if the mayor was out of order or not, as he had not seen the media release. But he did confirm that he had made an earlier ruling that the document was confidential. “I can give you my assurance that I will investigate the matter.”

According to the statement, the completion of the stadium had to meet a “pressing deadline and severe cost escalation”. The city entered into individual contracts with the professional team, which would have amounted to almost R640m.

De Lille said it was agreed that the city would pay a professional fee of R585m including disbursements for the stadium and its surrounds. This fee was 16 percent less than originally negotiated between the parties.

“The city is pleased that the dispute has been settled with the various disciplines constituting the professional team. The settlement is in the city’s interests and avoided the long, costly and risky process which would have confronted both parties through the arbitration appeal and the courts.”

She said the final construction cost of the stadium, as determined by the professional team’s quantity surveyor, was R3.64 billion.

The team also agreed to support the city and its legal team in quantifying the cost of the bid rigging by construction companies involved in the construction of the stadium.

The Competition Commission found that 15 construction companies were involved in price fixing and tender collusion for the World Cup stadium tenders. Two of these companies, Group Five and Wilson Bayly Holmes-Ovcon (WBHO), were responsible for building the Cape Town Stadium. Although the companies involved paid a combined R1.5bn in fines, the city is lodging a civil claim to recoup some of its costs.

“The city is determined to claw back damages... from the construction companies and is currently preparing a claim against the construction companies involved,” said De Lille.

She added that the agreement did not prevent the city from pursuing additional claims in terms of its professional indemnity insurance policy.

Deputy city manager Mike Marsden has said design changes to the stadium made the construction more costly. The city had been advised it could claim on insurance for design changes made during construction.

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

City, UCT look to sue price-fixers

Cape Town - FOUR months after the Competition Commission exposed major construction firms for tender collusion and price fixing, the city, UCT and the Construction Industry Development Board have yet to take action against the companies concerned.

In June the commission concluded a two-year process in which construction firms were invited to disclose corrupt activities which flouted competition law in exchange for leniency.

The commission fined 15 companies including Group Five, Aveng and WBHO a total of R1.5 billion.

Among other things, the companies admitted that a cartel of seven firms – Grinaker LTA, WBHO, Murray & Roberts, Group Five, Concor, Basil Read and Stefanutti – had agreed in 2006 to allocate tenders for World Cup stadium projects.

WBHO admitted to making an agreement with Group Five in 2006 over the R4.5bn Cape Town Stadium contract which was awarded to WBHO in a joint venture with Murray & Roberts.

The City of Cape Town has said it will lodge a civil claim against the companies and has spent R4 million appointing a law firm and construction industry experts to calculate how much the city was overcharged in the construction of the stadium.

Last week deputy city manager Mike Marsden said the city’s legal team and construction industry experts were still in the process of quantifying the damages. He said it was a “very complex task”.

“The process has to be thorough as the findings have to stand up in a court of law.”

The University of Cape Town may also lodge a damages claim against Group Five over the R87m Graça Machel women’s residence contract.

Stefanutti Stocks has admitted to helping Group Five win the contract and has said Group Five also paid other firms a losing fee of R500 000.

UCT spokeswoman Riana Geldenhuys said the university was waiting for the Competition Commission to complete its investigation into four projects in which Group Five disputed wrongdoing.

Meanwhile the Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB), which is compelled to investigate the construction companies, has not yet started.

If the CIDB investigation finds the companies guilty of prohibited practices, the board may fine the companies, deregister them or disqualify them from state tenders for a certain period.

Spokeswoman Kotli Molise said the board was still studying the consent agreements the commission had reached with the 15 companies involved.

zara.nicholson@inl.co.za

- Cape Times

Stadium business plan ‘lacks credibility’

Cape Town - Residents and ratepayers who attended the first public meeting on the future of Cape Town Stadium say the business plan being considered lacks credibility.

On its website, the Green Point Residents and Ratepayers Association also said the zoning amendments the city needed to allow for commercial activity at the stadium were based on the “flawed premise” that they were necessary to satisfy the business plan.

As these recommendations came from the city and were not open to public input, the process was “self-serving and predetermined to confirm the existing city policy”.

The assocation added: “The only plausible justification for having built the stadium (and for keeping it) is that it is an iconic building that adds value to Cape Town.

“We should therefore focus on using it for its core purpose, hosting sport events, and accept that the cost of only 0.12 percent of the city budget is an acceptable burden to bear.”

The stadium is running at a loss of least R40 million a year.

Geoff Underwood, the stadium development project manager, told the meeting that the new environmental authorisation and applications for rezoning would require extensive public participation, taking about 12 to 18 months. These applications would then be submitted to the provincial Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning.

Grant Pascoe, city mayoral committee member for tourism, events and marketing, said a poll earlier this year showed that only one-third of respondents did not support the proposed business plan, and fewer than 20 percent wanted the stadium demolished. However, there was strong support for demolition at the public meeting. Pascoe said this was not an option. “We will continue to pursue alternative options to make the stadium financially sustainable.”

The Green Point Residents and Ratepayers Association was concerned about the stadium’s financial viability. “The city was quite wrong about the financial implications of building the stadium. We can reasonably expect it to be quite wrong again about the financial implications of further development,” it said.

Underwood said the urban park would remain untouched, but that there were plans to use a piece of land on the Granger Bay side for an eight-storey building.

The next public participation opportunity, to discuss the environmental and land-use applications, will be early in 2014.

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

‘Just knock Cape Town Stadium down’

Cape Town - Knock it down, Green Point ratepayers told the city’s planners at the first public information meeting about ways in which the Cape Town Stadium could earn its keep.

With the stadium losing money at a rate of almost R40 million a year, the best option would be to demolish it, at a cost of R20m, so that the City of Cape Town could recover its costs within three months.

This was one of the many suggestions that those who object to the plans to rezone the stadium precinct to allow for income-generating commercial activity proposed.

But Geoff Underwood of Planning Partners, the team responsible for submitting and managing the land use applications, said demolition was not an option.

“The costs of demolishing this facility are enormous. It does not form part of our brief. We are here to make this wonderful facility work, not to knock it down.”

About 100 residents and interested parties attended Wednesday night’s meeting at the stadium, saying they were concerned about the implications of the commercial activities being considered.

David Polovin, chairman of the Green Point Common Coalition, said: “We are waiting with bated breath, but it’s only when Pandora’s Box is opened that we will know the impact.”

Underwood said: “The City of Cape Town has had to cover the financial shortfall since it took over operation of the stadium. The controllable costs of the stadium are about R52m a year. The income is about R13m. We as ratepayers face a considerable shortfall.”

But he would not hazard an estimate of how much income any development could generate. “I am not a business analyst, I am a town planner. My role is to set up the zoning rights. However, I can say every single additional rand generated out of this process is a rand less that needs to be put into the city, and a rand more that can be used for improving service delivery.”

He said the city was doing a business plan analysis to find ways of making the stadium more sustainable. The idea was to amend the zoning and environmental conditions that restricted commercial activity at the stadium so that it could generate funds.

Underwood said the area being considered for zoning changes was only about 17 hectares. Several approvals for the site were already in place.

The business plans include proposals for commercial office suites, mixed retail, third-party restaurants, contract parking, tourism and non-event related commercial activities.

“If you start looking inside the building, there are empty spaces that are tailor-made for offices and there are removable panels which create opportunities for coffee shops or other retail outlets,” said Underwood.

A mixed-use building on the Granger Bay Boulevard side could be built and used for parking, offices, a sports science centre or a hotel. This site is currently zoned as a public open space. This building would not be higher than eight storeys.

One resident asked why the city needed to build yet another structure when there was already plenty of space within the stadium.

But Underwood said the focus was on improving the economic sustainability of the stadium with the cross-subsidisation of another building. The development of the Granger Bay Boulevard site would improve the income stream for the city, he said.

Underwood said that no applications had been submitted yet. He said there were no plans to “tamper with the Green Point Urban Park”.

Carmen du Toit, of Environmental Planners

said, “The intention is to go public with the draft reports in the first quarter of 2014.”

The final reports are expected to be completed by the middle of next year.

anel.lewis@inl.co.za

- Cape Argus

Bid to get Cape Town Stadium millions back

Cape Town - The City of Cape Town is determined to recoup some of the billions it spent on building Cape Town Stadium.

* It is claiming on insurance for design changes that were made to the structure while it was being built.

* It is lodging a civil claim against the construction companies found by the Competition Commission to have been involved in tender rigging and price fixing for the project.

* It is in talks with the professional team to settle a disputed R200 million for construction fees.

Although the initial construction budget was estimated at R2.9 billion, costs ballooned to R4.5bn as the city raced to get the 2010 World Cup venue completed on time.

Deputy mayor Ian Neilson said in April that although the city had been suspicious about the rising costs, it had no option but to continue to meet Fifa’s deadline.

PricewaterhouseCoopers forecast then that the stadium would run at an annual loss of R7.1m for the first three years. But the city revealed earlier this year that its operating costs amounted to more than R436m since the 2009/10 financial year. Its income for the period was just R92m.

The city has subsequently spent R4m on advice from experts and lawyers to recover damages from the construction companies that admitted to rigging the bids and fixing prices.

Two years ago, the Competition Commission found that 15 construction companies had been involved in tender collusion and price fixing for World Cup stadium tenders, including Wilson Bayly Holmes-Ovcon (WBHO), Stefanutti Stocks, Murray & Roberts and Group Five.

Cape Town Stadium, built in 32 months by Group Five and WBHO, was one of the affected stadiums. Although the 15 firms reached a settlement agreement and paid a combined R1.5bn in fines, the City of Cape Town is lodging a civil claim to recoup some of the money it was overcharged.

An advocate specialising in construction has advised the city that it can also claim professional indemnity insurance if there was evidence of negligence or misjudgement in the design of the stadium, said deputy city manager Mike Marsden.

He told the city’s financial oversight committee that design changes to the raking columns made the stadium less rigid, so an additional bracing had to be inserted.

Pressed for more detail, Marsden said the changes to the stadium design “made the stadium construction more complex and costly”.

The city is also hoping to settle a disputed amount of R200m that was charged in professional fees. Marsden said that while the arbitrators found in favour of the professional team, which included architects, engineers and environmentalists, the city’s contractual agreement allowed it to appeal against this ruling.

Marsden said the city’s legal team were meeting the professional team to resolve the matter, and was confident of “a reasonable and a fair settlement”.

The city has been saddled with the running costs of the stadium since December 2010 when the original operation company SAIL and Stade de France terminated a 30-year contract.

Although various events have been held at the stadium, the city needs to look at a long-term operating model if it hopes to break even.

A premium anchor tenant would ensure returns on the investment, and there has been speculation that the Western Province Football Rugby Union might move from Newlands to Green Point. Other tenants mooted are Big Concerts, Ajax and Chippa United.

It is also hoped to change the zoning that restricts commercial activities on non-event days. Options here include a casino, a nightclub and possibly a hotel.

- Cape Argus

‘City can’t be blamed for Philippi floods’ - they can actually...

Cape Town - Cape Town Mayor Patricia de Lille has rubbished claims by the Schaapkraal Civic and Environmental Association that the City of Cape Town is guilty of “gross neglect” in its poor response to flooding in the Philippi area.

She said the association’s secretary, Nazeer Sonday, was “clearly speaking for the ANC” on the issue of the Philippi Horticultural Area’s production value.

The city controversially approved an application to move the urban edge to allow for a private housing development on the land.

“The whole of the city, not just the horticultural area, experienced the worst floods in many years,” said De Lille. “The City of Cape Town always pro-actively prepares for the winter rains through our comprehensive winter readiness programme.”

But Sonday said: “Our farmlands are under water. Our homes are under water. The lack of proper infrastructure is causing flooding. Our roads look like rivers. Our businesses are suffering.”

The roads in the Schaapkraal Smallholding area, Highlands Estate and Knole Park Estate became rivers in winter, he said.

A 2009 report detailing the area’s flooding problems was submitted to the council.

“We called for the city to put down rural open concrete channels in our roads and improve drainage by improving our rural open sloot system,” it read.

Despite numerous meetings, there had been no investment in managing the problem.

A second study in 2012 contained recommendations that would have improved service delivery and helped address crime and illegal dumping in the area. But Sonday said this study was also shelved.

“Does the mayor deliberately want to destroy the breadbasket of Cape Town?” he asked.

Sonday and the civic association had challenged the city’s approval of the proposal to develop a portion of the horticultural area, saying it produces 50 percent of the vegetables consumed in the city.

But De Lille said this was a misrepresentation, since the area produced only 80 000 tons of the 333 000 tons of leafy vegetables the city needed.

“Sonday fails to mention that this produce is mostly sold to high-end retailers and is exported. The area is not, therefore, as he claims, the breadbasket of the poor,” she said.

De Lille said Sonday could not speak for the whole horticultural area, as there were farmers and land-owners who had indicated they wanted to sell their land. She said he should rather direct his concerns to the ANC ward councillor “who had dismally failed the community” if he had any service delivery queries.

- Cape Argus