Councillor Wissler and CLO Jaques van Rensburg have their say

Ward 23 councillor Sarah Wissler has provided her comment on the situation in Glenvista Extension Four, where residents are being threatened with having their water cut off.

Her comment follows the story titled ‘Outcry from residents’ that appeared on page 1 of the Comaro CHRONICLE on January 22. It was reported that workers threatened to down tools on the water replacement project, saying they had not been paid by the contractor since December last year.

“I fully appreciate and sympathise with the residents on the dismal failure of the water replacement project. It has been a battle with the contractor since the beginning,” commented Wissler.

“Myself and the CLO [community liaison officer] Jaques van Rensburg have had many meetings and emails back and forth with Joburg Water and the contractor on his substandard work and moreover his non-payment of the general workers,” Wissler continued. “They have downed tools before during 2019 because he didn’t pay the staff. This ultimately is a contractual issue between Joburg Water and the contractor.

“I as councillor cannot be involved in contractual issues as it would be considered political interference in an administrative matter.

“However, I did plead with Joburg Water to make arrangements to pay the contractor earlier to avoid further problems. I had also asked the Deputy Chief Whip to stand in for me at the meeting as I was away on holiday at the time.

“The issues around the meeting on January 11 are unfortunate.

“The CLO called the meeting and invited all the role players involved to address the community. I had intended to pop by as I had another activity planned, but had to cancel that as well due to the power outage in Glenvista Proper, where residents were without power for five days.

“This issue was compounded by the City Power pillar box being inside a resident’s property and City Power was being denied access to its infrastructure. We suspect encroachment onto the servitude.

“While negotiating with the residents and City Power, the pillar box exploded, causing more problems for the residents.

“While I fully empathise with the very emotive threats the community felt were directed at them and their properties at the time, I had to make a decision as to which of the meetings needed me the most.

“As it turned out, there were both councillors and the CLO present who were able to deal with questions and ensure that there was adequate, reasonable and transparent communication between the contractor and the community.

“Contracts awarded and managed by the City, through the contractor, the relevant city official and the community liaison officer are run and managed on a very different basis to that which prevails in the private sector, and as one resident eloquently put it, much of what became the source of discontent should not have been laid at the door of the residents.

“Contractual issues remain the preserve of the three parties concerned: the City, the contractor, and the CLO, whose responsibility it is to manage communication and relations between the contractor, his community workers, and communicating with residents on matters of progress, delays, and the like.

“Equally, the councillor has a mainly oversight role to ensure that matters that cannot be addressed through the normal contractual process are escalated to the city in the appropriate manner.

“In all instances, there has to be a clear division between responsibilities and how information is communicated so that there is the least disruption to the equilibrium of residents.

“The matter of discord on various social platforms was discussed with the Deputy Chief Whip who then had meetings with myself and the CLO. His advice and decision was that I should convert this project communication group to a broadcast group to protect and reinforce my oversight role in the project and that the CLO set up a mirror group and use that to communicate project matters with the affected communities and the ward councillor. In this way, roles are more clearly reinforced and there is greater discipline between the various interested and affected parties.”

Response from Van Rensburg

CLO Jaques van Rensburg said, “The community meeting wasn’t purely contractual issues with Joburg Water. The residents of Glenvista Extension Four wanted to know what was put in place for these threats not to surface again, as well as the fact the project is well over the completion time set out and wanted to discuss these matters with Wissler.

“As it stands the project is at a complete halt again. On January 20 I called the councillor to alert her and to date nothing has been done.”

He went on to say, “Wissler speaks of all these meetings, but I would like to point out the following meeting on January 6, I invited Wissler to attend a meeting between myself, the contractor and Joburg Water, and she declined.

“On January 7, I informed and invited Wissler to a community meeting that would be held on January 11.

“Subsequently, she declined the invitation the night before (January 10) at 9.43pm, which was also the first time Wissler made contact with me again.

“The question is, why couldn’t she schedule her meeting earlier, not later? To date Wissler has never attended any official meetings on site since my appointment in May 2019. I have also only received (been copied) in two emails from her since then.

“She also indicated she would arrange the next meeting, not sure why she would only want to ‘pop’ by the one arranged by myself as both would be of equal importance.”

With this, the CHRONICLE considers the matter between Ward 23 councillor Sarah Wissler and CLO Jacques van Rensburg as closed.

ALSO READ:

Glenvista Ext Four residents furious