On the eve of the High Court action challenging its new fixed charges, the City of Cape Town has viciously attacked the CTCRA in affidavits before the Court.
The City of Cape Town Collective Ratepayers’ Association CTCRA has responded by saying that it has a unique perspective of the impact of new tariffs on residents and ratepayers across Cape Town – and has a duty to make the Court aware of them.
The City’s claims are as follows:
- CTCRA’s chairperson doesn’t have the expertise to present evidence as an “expert”;
- It questions whether CTCRA’s members are duly constituted as residents’ and ratepayers’ associations;
- It claims CTCRA represents a very small proportion of community organisations and doesn’t represent most owners in their respective suburbs;
- CTCRA represents exclusive and affluent areas with relatively high property values, are not representative of the city’s residents and does not represent ordinary residents;
- It questions CTCRA’s validity and whether its members consented to joining the case as ‘friends of the court’;
- CTCRA doesn’t represent informal areas whose services need to be improved nor residents who qualify for rebates or indigent grants and is only interested in members with properties valued between R3.5m and R7m;
- It casts doubt on the petition objecting to the City’s budget which attracted over 12,000 signatures; and
- CTCRA, it says, represents the majority of historically privileged and advantaged.
In its response, the CTCRA says its puzzled at the City’s attack on its credibility. The City has failed to speak about the impact of its budget on middle-class residents.
- CTCRA cannot formally engage with the City although its constituency is affected by the City’s policies and significantly contributes to the City’s coffers;
- Ratepayer associations are voluntary with no staff and resources to access information that the City has;
- It challenges the claim that CTCRA’s submissions are irrelevant because its members are “affluent”;
- To suggest that CTCRA’s members are not willing to contribute to social upliftment is manifestly wrong, it says. They have done so through property rates linked to valuations;
- Furthermore, CTCRA chides the City for errors in its submission: it has not taken account of Vat on the city-wide cleaning charge and its claim that only residential ratepayers will pay the R2.4 billion cleaning budget is wrong because commercial ratepayers will also contribute.