Not so long ago, there has been some arguments in the public discourse about what to do with dysfunctional municipalities. This dysfunctionality is either said to be arising from poor performance by some municipalities, as evidenced by the recent audit outcomes presented by the AGSA, Ms Tsakane Maluleke.

Others tend to blame the outcomes of the municipal demarcation processes as being responsible for having led to dysfunctional amalgamated municipalities. My point here is that there are many reasons accounting for dysfunctionality and as such, we can not adopt a one size fits all approach to find a solution to these. Also, if we misdiagnose the cause and problem of dysfunctional municipalities, our prescription may be off the mark, leading to further complications instead of resolving the challenge.

I firmly contend here that dissolving dysfunctional municipalities to hold fresh elections is not the answer to the challenges plaguing local government. History and research makes it clear that simply changing the council—the political structure of a municipality—does not magically produce the desired outcomes. Dissolving the political structure could therefore be akin in some instances to addressing the symptoms instead of the root causes.

The systematic and complex issues facing local governments are deep-rooted and require a far more comprehensive, differentiated and nuanced approach.

In recent weeks, we’ve repeatedly tried to convey this message to the public, especially following the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (CoGTA), Mr. Velenkosini Hlabisa's announcement of his plans to dissolve dysfunctional municipalities and hold fresh elections.

To put it bluntly, a one-size-fits-all approach will not solve the systematic and complex problems besetting the sector.

Fortunately, in South Africa, we have an intergovernmental system grounded in the principle of cooperation between the three spheres of government—local, provincial, and national. Yet, we often overlook Section 154 of the Constitution, which mandates that national and provincial governments must support and strengthen the capacity of municipalities to manage their own affairs.

While municipalities are given administrative responsibilities, the legislative authority remains with the national and provincial governments.

As a starting point, I will outline the conditions under which a municipality can be dissolved and then unpack the merits and pitfalls of past instances where this very approach has led to unintended, and often undesirable, consequences.

• RSA Constitution, Section 139 (1) (c) - When a municipality cannot or does not fulfil an executive obligation in terms of the Constitution or legislation, the relevant provincial executive may intervene by taking any appropriate steps to ensure fulfilment of that obligation, including - dissolving the Municipal Council and appointing an administrator until a newly elected Municipal Council has been declared elected, if exceptional circumstances warrant such a step.

• Section 159 (2) - If a Municipal Council is dissolved in terms of national legislation, or when its term expires, an election must be held within 90 days of the date that Council was dissolved or its term expired.

• Municipal Systems Act, Section 34( 1 ) A municipal council may dissolve itself at a meeting called specifically for this purpose. by adopting a resolution dissolving the council with a supporting vote of at least two thirds of the councillors. (2) A municipal council may dissolve itself council was last elected.

• Municipal Systems Act, Section 34(3) The MEC for local government in a province, by notice in the Provincial Gazette, may dissolve a municipal council in the province if— (a) the Electoral Commission in terms of section 23(2)(a) of the Demarcation Act is of the view that a boundary determination affects the representation of voters in that council, and the remaining part of the existing term of municipal councils is more than one year

Early this year in February, the Democratic Alliance (DA) lost a bid to dissolve eThekwini Metro council. Those who voted against the dissolution of the council were 128. While those in support of the motion were 75 councillors. The dissolution would have prompted for fresh elections in the metro in terms of the Municipal Systems Act, Section 34( 1 ) as stated above. 

It will be a lie to purport that what the Minister of CoGTA has been calling for is not permissible as per relevant prescripts but this does not make his thinking beyond reproach and unchallengeable. 

Take for example: In the Eastern Cape, specifically in an area historically surrounding Queenstown, there were originally three municipalities: Tsolwana, Nkwanca, and Lukhanji. These municipalities were later amalgamated in terms of the Demarcation Act to form what is now known as the Enoch Mgijima Local Municipality. This process, facilitated by the Municipal Demarcation Board, directed by the executive, and ultimately approved by Parliament, effectively concentrated poverty into a single point.

The act of Parliament, advanced by supposedly qualified and suitable Ministries, misled many into believing that merging these municipalities would be beneficial—a case of oversimplifying complex issues. In this instance, three dysfunctional municipalities were amalgamated and the outcome was a bigger dysfunctional municipality.

Let us examine the historical facts of the misguided leadership that led to the creation of this dysfunctional municipality, which is now often blamed on local councillors. At the time of amalgamation, Nkwanca was allocated approximately R18 million, Tsolwana about R12 million, and Lukhanji about R50 million. It must be understood that two of these municipalities were financially bankrupt with no viable sources of income, which led the then Minister to believe that Lukhanji could cross-subsidize services to the others. However, what was overlooked was that Tsolwana and Nkwanca were category one municipalities, while Lukhanji was a category three.

The after-amalgamation support promised by COGTA and National Treasury for these amalgamated municipalities was either absent or negligible to say the least. A critical variable, financial viability, was not well addressed in this instance and in many others. As such, despite all the good intentions, and alongside other variables, this lack of financial viability continues to play a critical role in the dysfunctionality of that municipality.

When the Ditsobotla Local Municipality in North West was dissolved, the intended results were not achieved. In fact, we find ourselves more than five steps backwards; the municipality is in greater disarray than before the dissolution. Another case study is the amalgamation of the Ventersdorp and Tlokwe municipalities, now known as JB Marks Municipality, also in the North West. Ventersdorp, a level 3 municipality, was amalgamated with Tlokwe, a level 5 municipality—a disaster waiting to happen. Currently, JB Marks is a hung municipality with a slim ANC-led majority (50+1).

They are operating under a Government of Local Unity (GLU) in partnership with the Patriotic Alliance to maintain their majority. The future of JB Marks (Tlokwe & Ventersdorp) looks bleak, and with the current state of affairs, we are likely to see more municipalities in a similar situation in the upcoming 2026 local government elections.

Another example is the Pretoria amalgamation. A study was conducted to determine the cost of providing services to the newly amalgamated community. The estimated cost was R3.5 billion, but unfortunately, the National Treasury only allocated R800 million—far below the actual cost of service delivery.

We must draw lessons from such experiences.

A distinction must be made between a municipality and its municipal council. The Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA), read together with the Systems and Structures Act, provides clear guidance on the roles and responsibilities of councillors and officials. Municipalities are the core institutions within the sphere of local government, while municipalities are organs of state that consist of the political structures and administration of the municipality and the community within (residents inhabiting) the municipal area.

A municipal council is a body consisting of directly or indirectly elected councillors. A municipal council is thus one of the political structures of a municipality. Dissolving a municipal council and calling for new elections will only affect the political arm of the municipality or, worse, bring back the very same political party or individuals that were intended to be dissolved.

"Municipality" is, therefore, a much broader concept and a more inclusive collection of institutions or structures than a municipal council. A municipality and its council are not synonymous with each other. The MFMA and the Systems and Structures Act establish a separation of roles and responsibilities between the mayor and the council, and the mayor and the municipal manager. This illustrates the governance and accountability relationships between the political and administrative structures within a municipality.

This is among the reasons I expressed strong opposition to the idea of dissolving municipalities as proposed by the Minister. The importance of local government autonomy does not align with the assumption that dissolving municipalities would resolve the underlying issues they face. Municipalities are crucial for local governance and development, and dissolving them would undermine the progress made since the establishment of a democratic local government system in South Africa.

Municipalities are facing extreme cash flow constraints, and the solution lies in addressing these financial issues and improving support for municipalities rather than dissolving them. Many of the challenges municipalities face stem from historical inequalities and a lack of resources, which need to be tackled through increased investment and support rather than drastic measures like dissolution.

The second leg of a municipality is what is called administration. A municipality has the right to govern on its own initiative the local government affairs of its community. To govern means to exercise governmental authority. A municipality exercises its legislative authority by making and administering bylaws for the effective administration of the matters that it has the right to administer. A municipality has the right to administer the local government matters listed in parts B of Schedules 4 and 5 to the Constitution and any other matter assigned to it by national or provincial legislation.

This leg is responsible for implementing all mentioned above, including prudently spending financial resources allocated by the council or board of directors. The third leg is the shareholders, referred to in the South African context as communities. According to municipal laws, this leg is an important category wherein before approving plans commonly known as Integrated Developmental Plan (IDP) and budget, communities must be consulted, and their views must be considered.

If you dissolve a municipality, it means removing those who every five years are elected by the community, commonly known as councillors. The constitution requires communities to elect their local leaders. Thus, you may dissolve them, but they may be re-elected, and the chronic issues remain unresolved.

It is our considered position that the 7th Administration, which Minister Hlabisa forms part of, must assist us in addressing the stubborn challenges that continue to bedevil the local government’s progress. 

These include: 

• Governance and oversight challenges, including strengthening community involvement and ownership of development in municipalities.

• Integrated development and safe, inclusive human settlements, in particular dealing with the key levers required to enable local government to effectively transform our municipal spaces and direct development.

• Confronting our energy and infrastructural challenges and making long-term sustainable choices.

Finding a more nuanced solution to municipal viability and dysfunctionality than the blunt technical municipal demarcation instrument.

• Intergovernmental debt and rising consumer indebtedness, as well as the declining revenue base of municipalities; and

• Linked thereto, the viability and long-term financial sustainability of the sector.

We have expressed our discontent with the rising tide of Section 139 Interventions and the attempts by other spheres of government to infringe on the powers and functions of local government. We have a duty to ensure that the institutional integrity of local government is not only preserved but strengthened to expedite our developmental mandate.

The focus should be on strengthening municipal financial management, enhancing administrative capacity, and ensuring community involvement in governance processes to create sustainable and effective local governments.

As an association of municipalities, SALGA as the thought leader, protector and strategic disruptor of local government has clearly defined its role  within the intergovernmental  and recognised that solution for the sector can only be found within the system principle of cooperation between the three spheres of government – local, provincial and national.

We stand for meaningful intergovernmental relations that advances a concerted collective effort to address the ongoing challenges that impede service delivery. Evidently, merely dissolving municipalities won't propel us forward.

Written by SALGA President Bheke Stofile