Democratic Alliance eThekwini objections to gazetted ward demarcations
Note: A response was received from the MDB’s Robert Willemse acknowledging this submission:
“All submissions will be considered by the Board. In terms of the Structures Act, 1998, the Board may confirm, withdraw/vary a delimitation. The final decisions of the MDB will be gazetted after 19 August 2010.”
A further response from Robert relating to when these Demarcations will be reflected in the IEC data follows:
“The MDB already submitted some of its ward delimitations to the IEC – to empower the IEC to prepare for the 2011 elections.
All wards, including the final wards for eThekwini, will be submitted to the IEC by 1 Sept 2010. The MDB will consider all recorded objections by 19 Aug 2010.”
Summary: DA in eThekwini objections to 1 July gazetted ward demarcation proposals
The DA submitted proposals with the key intention of reuniting fragmented communities and during the consultation process reminded the MDB that it has a legislated mandate to do the same. We are disappointed that despite this the second round of MDB proposals do not address the issue of several communities split between multiple wards.
We’ve just completed a very successful FIFA Soccer World Cup tournament in our country which has helped unite our people. Coming out of the event, where we’ve all seen what government can do if it sets its mind to it, the one thing we have common agreement on is the prioritisation of service delivery, something our Government has been emphasising of late.
All proposals tabled should thus seek to improve service delivery and therefore the more practical the shapes wards have and the more easily recognisable the ward is to the surrounding communities, the more effective the ward councillor will be able to be.
The proposals tabled by the DA, ANC and the original MDB proposals do not require the splitting of any Voting Districts. Further, the DA proposals succeed in reuniting several communities which had been split over multiple wards in both the old and new MDB proposals and the ANC proposals.
It is our contention thus, that of the three sets of proposals, the DA’s proposals are most compliant with the legislation and most likely to result in an improvement in service delivery. Wards which are as closely identifiable with communities as possible will thus greatly simplify the process of finding the correct ward councillor when a community member is in need.
We are concerned that the MDB has accepted only one of the DA’s proposals which seeks to reunite fragmented communities and particularly the basis upon which such selective application has been made. Our proposals for wards 12 and 14 which intended to address the KwaNdengezi community being split in two were accepted, yet proposals in other areas such as Verulam which arguably had more merit were not.
Warwick Chapman and Geoff Pullan
Democratic Alliance Demarcation Coordinators, eThekwini Muncipality
FORM MDB5 (Download)
WARD DELIMITATION
OBJECTION IN TERMS OF ITEM 5(2) OF SCHEDULE 1 TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT: MUNICIPAL STRUCTURES ACT, 1998
Name of municipality: eThekwini
Code: ETH
Name of aggrieved person/institution: Democratic Alliance
Contact person in case of an institution: Warwick Chapman and Geoff Pullan
Address: c/o City Hall, Durban
Tel. number: N/A Cell number: 083 7797 094 and 083 6959190
Email address: ward18@ethelkwini.org and geoffpullan@iafrica.com
We hereby object to the delimitation of the boundaries of the following wards:
| WARD | REASON/MOTIVATION |
| 102 | Very strange shape, no recognisable community served |
| 34 | Observe the very significant boundary that is the N2 national highway |
| 35 | Observe the very significant boundary that is the N2 national highway |
| 11 | Observe the very significant boundary that is the N2 national highway |
| 30 | Unify split Cato Manor community under a single ward |
| 31 | Observe N3 and Ridge Rd as boundaries |
| 32 | Observe N3 and Ridge Rd as boundaries |
| 26 | Unify split CBD and South beach communities |
| 27 | Unify split North beach and Morningside communities |
| 28 | Unify split Musgrave and Greyville communities |
| 29 | Unify split Chesterville community |
| 18 | Reunites Pinetown community under a single ward |
| 24 | Reunites Westville community under a single ward |
| 52 | Unnecessary changes |
| 53 | Unnecessary changes |
| 55 | Unnecessary changes |
| 57 | Unnecessary changes |
| 9 | Unify split Hillcrest community under a single ward |
| 9 (VD Split) | Ratio in which this VD is split is probably incorrect |
| 10 | Unify split Hillcrest community under a single ward |
| 91/6 | Split VD and correct unwieldy shape |
We request the Municipal Demarcation Board to consider the following alternative proposals:
| Ward | Preferred VD listing | Motivation |
| 102 | 43362288 1983 43360725 2422 43360736 2155 43362042 2624 43360624 3117 43360635 1121 43362222 3110 Total: 16532 |
In the case of ward 102, VD 43350049 contains the land upon which the significant Cornubia housing development will take place. Cornubia is planned to contain over 70000 individual housing units[1] which are to be built between this election and the next. We thus expect Cornubia to become either a ward of its own, or more likely, several new wards once completed. The DA’s proposal for this area caters for this eventuality and ensures that the splits can be executed easily without producing oddly shaped wards as would result from the other proposals. Lastly, our proposal for ward 58 succeeds in keeping the airport and beachfront communities in a single ward while not affecting the unity of the Verulam community which we consildated into Ward 60. |
| 35 | 43350016 3603 43350049 1893 43350050 2800 43350027 3435 43350038 3986 Total: 15717 |
In our proposals, we specifically structured wards 102 (above), 36 (MDB accepted our proposal) 35, 34 and 11 such that they observed the very significant boundary that is the N2 national highway. |
| 34 | 43360455 2030 43360466 1400 43360444 2618 43360499 2792 43360398 2790 43360477 3190 43360488 1444 Total: 16264 |
In our proposals, we specifically structured wards 102 (above), 36 (MDB accepted our proposal) 35, 34 and 11 such that they observed the very significant boundary that is the N2 national highway. |
| 11 | 43360589 2378 43360523 2160 43360501 2468 43360512 1068 43360590 1131 43360602 2659 43360613 2202 43362211 2045 Total: 16111 |
In our proposals, we specifically structured wards 102 (above), 36 (MDB accepted our proposal) 35, 34 and 11 such that they observed the very significant boundary that is the N2 national highway. |
| 30 | 43371413 3513 43371424 2926 43371828 7159 43371390 4555 Total: 18153 |
In the gazetted proposals, Cato Manor is split between wards 29, 30 and 101. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, the Cato Manor community is avoidably split into 3 and thus in contravention of this requirement. |
| 31 | 43360242 2208 43360286 1182 43360275 2051 43360231 1477 43360219 1592 43360118 1449 43360264 2561 43360309 1731 Total: 14251 |
Using the very recognisable boundaries of the N3 national highway into the City and the road which runs along the top of the Berea, Ridge Rd, our proposals structured a very recognisable and easily defined set of wards. Because the Berea comprises high density residential areas immediately adjacent to one another, it is even more important to have very clear boundaries separating wards. For this reason we tried to make use of the most recognisable boundaries in the area. We are convinced that service delivery is assisted when a community can easily identify their ward councillor. Conversely, it is easier for ward councillors to provide a service when the area they serve is easily identifiable. |
| 32 | 43371244 6603 43371301 2590 43371288 1942 43371299 1639 43371985 2014 Total: 14788 |
As above |
| 26 | 43360017 2886 43360040 3047 43360028 3047 43360039 2223 43371255 5514 Total: 16717 |
In the gazetted proposals, the CBD is split between wards 26 and 28. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, the CBD community is avoidably split into 2 and thus in contravention of this requirement. |
| 27 | 43360073 2044 43360062 2839 43360185 2763 43360163 1724 43360174 3114 43360196 1190 43360208 1940 Total: 15614 |
In the gazetted proposals, the North Beach community is split between wards 26 and 27. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, the North Beach community is avoidably split into 2 and thus in contravention of this requirement. |
| 28 | 43360107 2698 43360130 1746 43360084 3298 43360095 2402 43360141 2491 43360152 2269 Total: 14904 |
In the gazetted proposals, the CBD and parts of Musgrave are lumped into the same ward. These are vastly distinct communities and while our proposal above addresses the CBD issue, this proposal deals with the Musgrave and Greville communities which are split by these proposals. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, these communities are avoidably split and thus in contravention of this requirement. |
| 29 | 43370502 2673 43370388 3762 43371491 1360 43371480 2666 43371839 2617 43371435 2510 Total: 15588 |
In the gazetted proposals, the Chesterville is split between ward 29 and 24. These are vastly distinct communities and this proposal and our proposal below for ward 24 seeks to remedy the proposed situaiton. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, these communities are avoidably split and thus in contravention of this requirement. |
| 18 | 43390504 3533 43390964 441 43390571 4015 43390515 5502 43390560 2361 Total: 15852 |
In the gazetted proposals, the Pinetown community is split between ward 18, 21 and 16. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, these communities are avoidably split and thus in contravention of this requirement. Our proposal seeks to reunite the entire Pinetown community under a single ward 18, and removing the significant Westville portion currently in ward 18. |
| 24 | 43390784 1562 43390076 2479 43390201 2956 43390212 2217 43390526 3518 43390087 4189 Total: 16921 |
In the gazetted proposals, the Westville community is split between wards 18, and 24. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, these communities are avoidably split and thus in contravention of this requirement. Westville is a very distinct and identifiable community which is current split across wards 18 and 24, proving counter-productive when community members seek to identify their councillor. |
| 52 | 43361524 1746 43361535 1308 43361838 2008 43361849 1608 43361850 2195 43361861 1998 43361872 2555 43361883 1145 43361894 2118 Total: 16681 |
We see no reason whatsoever for the changes made to the wards 52, 53, 55 and 57. The changes are limited entirely to that group of four wards in that the VDs have been shifted from one ward to an adjacent other until the knock-on effect has been neutralised. It would appear that the changes are unnecessary and split existing communities. |
| 53 | 43360129 3701 43360253 1084 43360927 1597 43361287 6627 43361760 1448 43361940 1007 43361951 2009 Total: 17473 |
We see no reason whatsoever for the changes made to the wards 52, 53, 55 and 57. The changes are limited entirely to that group of four wards in that the VDs have been shifted from one ward to an adjacent other until the knock-on effect has been neutralised. It would appear that the changes are unnecessary and split existing communities. |
| 55 | 43360792 946 43361333 1401 43361344 1392 43361366 1237 43361399 2178 43361401 1678 43361489 2385 43361669 1966 43361670 1480 43362008 2419 Total: 17082 |
We see no reason whatsoever for the changes made to the wards 52, 53, 55 and 57. The changes are limited entirely to that group of four wards in that the VDs have been shifted from one ward to an adjacent other until the knock-on effect has been neutralised. It would appear that the changes are unnecessary and split existing communities. |
| 57 | 43361557 2769 43361681 3596 43362154 2145 43362165 3689 43362176 2405 43362187 1008 43362244 1123 Total: 16735 |
We see no reason whatsoever for the changes made to the wards 52, 53, 55 and 57. The changes are limited entirely to that group of four wards in that the VDs have been shifted from one ward to an adjacent other until the knock-on effect has been neutralised. It would appear that the changes are unnecessary and split existing communities. |
| 60 | 43350140 1229 43350072 1600 43350139 1595 43350487 353 43350151 2369 43350195 418 43350162 1658 43350173 2619 43350184 1821 43580820 2701 43584026 467 43584037 736 Total: 17566 |
The DA’s proposal for Verulam was one of the most important in our package of 53 proposed. In all the other proposals tabled, the town of Verulam was split over multiple wards for no reason we can readily ascertain. The legislation as well as the DA’s proposals seek to reunite the fragmented community of Verulam under a single ward councillor. We thus request some explanation why our sensible proposals have not been accepted. |
| 9 | 43400078 4088 43400450 2000 43400405 3188 43400797 3693 43400810 996 43400854 798 43400865 2336 43583171 931 Total: 18030 |
While our proposal for ward 9 did result in an elongated ward, it must be understood that the Hillcrest/Waterfall community resides on either side of Inanda Rd M33 which extends from the east to the west along the length of our proposed ward. Further, assuming the revised split estimate tabled below is accepted, we propose that in order to reduce the fragmentation of the Hillcrest community, the northern portion of the split VD (43400450) be moved to Ward 9 from ward 10, the Hillcrest High School VD (43400078) be moved back into ward 9 from ward 8, the portion of the split Forest View Primary VD (43400393) be moved into ward 10. The intention would thus be to create a ward which extends the length of the M33 Inanda Rd. The Act specifically requires that in performing demarcation you avoid the fragmentation of communities. Patently, this community has been avoidably split and thus the current proposal for ward 9 is in contravention of this requirement. |
| 10 | 43400045 4404 43400067 5056 43400393 2689 43400438 2368 43400809 813 43400843 883 Total: 16213 |
In order to reunify the Hillcrest Community as described above, VD 43400393 is required to move into this ward. |
| 9 (VD Split) | 43400450 (Hillcrest Library Activities Room) The new proposal included in the MDB’s gazetted proposals to split VD 43400450 (Hillcrest Library Activities Room) in two provides an opportunity to address to an extent the elongated nature of our ward 9 proposal. We do, however, dispute the accuracy of the estimated number of voters in each part of the split VD. Considering the orthographic overlay below showing location of residential areas, the proposed split for 43400450 is more likely to be 2000 in the northern portion and 137 in the southern portion (and not 1000 and 1137 respectively). The northern portion contains all of the residential dwellings in the VD and the southern portion only a few farmhouses and rural dwellings. ![]() |
|
| 6/91 | Since the 1 July gazetted eThekwini proposals include the splitting of a few VDs, we would like to bring the the attention of the MDB a very unweildy VD which results in a very strangely shaped Ward 6. 43400146 (Kwamyeza School) has an extremely unfortunate shape and sufficient voters (3333) that it should be split into two or preferably three more sensibly shaped VDs. The Voting Station is in the south eastern end of the VD (Emalangeni) and thus voters in the north west (Moya) are much closer to other VDs. We would thus propose that 43400146 (Kwamyeza School) be merged with 43400540 (Dept Of Works) and then split into 3 new VDs something along the lines of the rough diagram provided below. ![]() |
|
I confirm that:
each cluster of voting districts form a contiguous ward;
the number of voters in each ward fall within the minimum and maximum of voters allowed per ward;
the proposed ward boundaries comply, in general, with the criteria.
SIGNATURE
NAME AND SURNAME
DATE
1. Sutcliffe: http://www.durban.gov.za/durban/government/media/cmn/cmnitem.2008-08-29.4130384866

