PROCESS PLAN FOR THE SECOND YEAR OF THE IDP REVIEW

Document Sample
PROCESS PLAN FOR THE SECOND YEAR OF THE IDP REVIEW Powered By Docstoc
					                              PROCESS PLAN
                              FOR THE
                 REVIEW OF DANNHAUSER IDP FOR 2005/6


SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND



1.1 INTRODUCTION
1..1   According to the legislative requirements set out in the Municipal Systems Act of
       2000 (MSA) as well as the Planning and Performance Management Regulations
       All municipalities, both Districts and Local, have had to prepare an IDP and
       subsequently submitted it to the MEC for Local Government. The assessment
       was done in terms of Chapter 5, Section 25, of the Municipal Systems Act (MSA).

       In terms of Section 34 of the MSA:

           A municipal council-

           (a)         must review in accordance its integrated development plan-
                       (i)     annually in accordance with an assessment of its performance
                               measurements in terms of section 41; and
                       (ii)    to the extent that changing circumstances so demand; and

           (b)         may amend its IDP in accordance with a prescribed process

       The preparation of a Process Plan for the annual review is referred to in chapter
       5, Section 28 of the MSA as follows:

           Adoption of a process-

           (1) Each municipal council, within a prescribed period after the start of its elected
               term, must adopt a process set out in writing to guide the planning, drafting and
               adoption and review of its integrated development plan.

       As all municipalities in the province has finalized its IDP’s and is committed to the
       annual review as requested by the MEC, it became apparent that the IDP
       process, serving as the municipalities’ principle planning and management tool,
       is seamlessly integrated with especially the PMS and budgeting processes.

1..2   Municipalities throughout the Province are continuously in the process of
       reviewing and improving and updating its IDP. The Review process will address,
       amongst others, the following:

          Comments received from the various role-players in the assessment of the IDP
           Review documentation;



                                                                                                   1
           Areas requiring additional attention in terms of legislative requirements not addressed
            during the previous years of the IDP Review Process;

           The inclusion of the most current Census data;

           Consideration, review and inclusion of any relevant and new information;

           Shortcomings and weaknesses identified through self-assessment;

           The preparation and review of relevant sector plan and its alignment with the IDP;

           The preparation, if not already prepared, as well as consideration of a Performance
            Management System (PMS), in terms of Chapter 6 of the MSA, and its findings;

           The update of the 5-year Financial Plan as well as the list of projects, inclusive of a 3-
            year capital investment framework; and

           Preparation and finalisation of the annual municipal budget in terms of the relevant
            legislation.

1..3    Amendments have been made to the process followed for the 2005/6 IDP
        Review, namely:

           The name for the review has been amended to reflect the financial year in which it
            will be implemented; and

           The date at which a draft will be submitted to the Department of Traditional and Local
            Government Affairs (DT&LGA) has been changed to early December 2004. This
            change will ensure that the project identified in the IDP are suitable captured into the
            respective provincial and national government departments’ budgets.

        These changes were communicated to all municipalities by the DT&LGA.


1.2 PREARING AN IDP REVIEW

1.2.1   Process Plan

        In order to ensure certain minimum quality standards of the IDP Review process,
        and a proper coordination between and within spheres of government, the
        preparation of the Process Plan has been regulated in the MSA. The preparation
        of a Process Plan, which is in essence the IDP Review Process set in writing,
        requires adoption by Council. This plan has to include the following:

           A programme specifying the time frames for the different planning steps;

           Appropriate mechanisms, processes and procedures for consultation and
            participation of local communities, organs of state, traditional authorities, and other
            role players in the IDP drafting process;

           An indication of the organisational arrangements for the IDP process;




                                                                                                      2
           Binding plans and planning requirements, i.e. policy and legislation; and

           Mechanisms and procedures for vertical and horizontal alignment.

1.2.2   Framework Plan

        There exists a need for the preparation and adoption of a Framework Plan in
        each of the District Municipalities. The Framework Plan provides the linkage and
        binding relationships to be established between the district and local
        municipalities in the region. In doing so, proper consultation, coordination and
        alignment of the review process of the district municipality and various local
        municipalities can be maintained. A Framework Plan has been prepared for the
        2005/6 IDP Review by the Amajuba District Municipality in consultation with
        Dannhauser.




                                                                                        3
SECTION TWO: ORGANISATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS



2.1    IDP STEERING COMMITTEE

As part of the IDP preparation process, Council is to resolve to establish an IDP Steering
Committee, which will act as a support to the IDP Representative Forum, the Municipal
Manager and the IDP Manager. This Steering Committee, as well as the Representative
Forum are reconstituted for each review of the IDP.

The Municipal Financial Management Act (MFMA) will impact on the roles and
responsibilities of all key role players in the IDP Review Process. The Dannhauser
Municipality has, however, been identified as a “low” capacity municipality and as a
result, many of the requirements of the Act have been deferred until later financial years.

2.1.1. Terms of Reference for the IDP Steering Committee

       The proposed terms of reference for the IDP Steering Committee are as follows:

            Provides terms of reference for the various planning activities
            Commissions research studies
            Considers and comments on:
            o Inputs from sub-committee/s, study teams and consultants
            o Inputs from provincial sector departments and support providers
            Processes, summarises and document outputs
            Makes content recommendations
            Prepares, facilitates and documents meetings

2.2    THE IDP MANAGER AND RESPONSIBILITIES

       Amongst other, the following responsibilities have been allocated to the IDP
       Manager for the IDP Review Process:

           To ensure that the Process Plan is finalised and adopted by Council;
           To adjust the IDP according to the proposals of the MEC;
           To identify additional role-players to sit on the IDP Representative Forum;
           To ensure the continuous participation of role players;
           To monitor the participation of role players;
           To ensure appropriate procedures are followed;
           To ensure documentation is prepared properly;
           To carry out the day-to-day management of the IDP process;
           To respond to comments and enquiries;
           To ensure alignment of the IDP with other IDP’s within the District Municipality;
           To co-ordiante the preparation of the Sector Plans and their inclusion into the IDP
            documentation;
           To co-ordinate the inclusion of the Performance Management System (PMS) into the
            revised IDP;
           To submit the reviewed IDP to the relevant authorities.


                                                                                             4
2.3     IDP REPRESENTATIVE FORUM
2.3.1   Composition of IDP Representative Forum

        The IDP Representative Forum (IDP RF) was constituted as part of the
        preparation phase of the IDP and will continue its functions throughout the
        annual IDP Review process. The proposed composition of the IDP RF could be
        as follows:

                   EXCO members
                   Councillors
                   Traditional leaders
                   Ward Committee Chairperson
                   Senior municipal officials
                   Stakeholder representatives of organised groups
                   Advocates of unorganised groups
                   Resource persons
                   Other community representatives
                   National and Provincial Departments regional representatives
                   NGO’s
                   Parastatal organisations

2.3.2   Terms of Reference for the IDP Representative Forum

        The terms of reference for the IDP Representative Forum could be based on the
        composition of the constituency’s interests in the IDP process, and is proposed to
        be as follows:

                   Represent the interest of the municipality’s constituency in the IDP
                   process
                   Provide an organisational mechanism for discussion, negotiation and
                   decision making between the stakeholders inclusive of municipal
                   government
                   Ensure communication between all the stakeholder representatives
                   inclusive of municipal government
                   Monitor the performance of the planning and implementation process




                                                                                        5
SECTION THREE: ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES



3.1     ROLE PLAYERS

3.1.1   The following role players have been identified for the Dannhauser Municipality:

        Internal Role-players

                  Council and the Executive Committee;
                  Nominated Councilors;
                  Mayor;
                  Municipal officials;
                  Municipal Managers;
                  IDP Manager;
                  IDP Steering Committee;
                  Representative Forum/Civil Society; and
                  The District Municipality.

        External Role-players

                  Relevant Government Departments;
                  Planning professionals/facilitators;
                  Municipal officials; and
                  Representative Forum/Civil Society.


3.2     ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

3.2.1   As has been mentioned, the Municipal Financial Management Act (MFMA) will
        impact on the roles and responsibilities of all key role players in the IDP Review
        Process. The Dannhauser Municipality has, however, been identified as a “low”
        capacity municipality and as a result, many of the requirements of the Act have
        been deferred until later financial years.

        As such, the roles and responsibilities identified in the last round of the IDP
        Review will remain the same.




                                                                                             6
SECTION FOUR: MECHANISMS AND PROCEDURES FOR
PARTICIPATION



4.1   FUNCTIONS AND CONTEXT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

      Four major functions can be aligned with the public participation process namely:

       Needs orientation;
       Appropriateness of solutions;
       Community ownership; and
       Empowerment.

      Like with the preparation of the IDP, the public participation process in the IDP
      Review phase has to be institutionalised in order to ensure all residents have an
      equal right to participate.


4.2   MECHANISMS FOR PARTICIPATION

      The following mechanisms for participation in the Dannhauser IDP Review for
      2005/6 will apply:

      a) IDP Representative Forum

          This forum will represent all stakeholders and will be as inclusive as possible.
          Efforts will be made to bring additional organisations into the RF and ensure
          their continued participation throughout the process.

      b) Media

          Local newspapers will be used to inform the community of the progress of the
          Review phase. Municipal Notice Boards will also be utilised.

      c) Information sheets

          This will be prepared in English and isiZulu and be distributed via the
          Representative Forum. These will also be displayed on the Municipal Notice
          Boards.




                                                                                        7
4.3     PROCEDURES/PROCESS FOR PARTICIPATION
4.3.1   Representative Forum

        The representative forum will meet as indicated in the process plan.

4.3.2   Council Approval

        Council approval will be in accordance with the attached circular flow diagram
        whereby a draft will be approved, prior to submission to the DT&LGA, in
        November 2004, and the final IDP approved in June 2005.

4.3.3   Newspapers


        A progress report will be submitted to the local newspaper on the completion of
        the IDP Review, as well as on the completion of any of the Sector Plans.

4.3.4   Information Sheets


        At the completion of the IDP Review, an information sheet will be prepared in the
        two dominant languages, namely isiZulu and English. The members of the
        Representative Forum will distribute these information sheets.




                                                                                          8
SECTION FIVE: ACTION PROGRAMME


5.1     CORE ELEMENTS OF THE IDP REVIEW PHASE
        The core elements of the IDP review phase has been indicated in the
        accompanying diagram. The process is divided into the quarters, or three month
        periods of the financial year of the municipality. Each quarter and its major
        activities in terms of PMS, IDP and budgeting are included in the diagram.

5.2     DATES OF KEY IDP MEETINGS
5.2.1   IDP STEERING COMMITTEE

           August 2004:     Input into the Process Plan prior to approval by EXCO.
           October 2004:    To monitor progress on the IDP Review.
           November 2004: Projects identification.
           March 2005:      Discussions on changes to documentation based on
            comments from the DT&LGA and the MEC, formulation of the Capital
            Investment Programme (CIP) and the MTEF.
           May 2005:        Meeting to discuss and adopt final draft of the IDP.

5.2.2   IDP REPRESENTATIVE FORUM

           August 2004:     Process Plan approval, discussions on content of 2005/6
            IDP Review.
           October 2004:    Progress reports, SDF finalisation, project identification.
           November 2004: Adoption of DRAFT IDP document and recommendations
            to EXCO and Council to adopt the DRAFT IDP document.
           March 2005:      Discussions on changes to documentation based on
            comments from the DT&LGA and the MEC, formulation of the Capital
            Investment Programme (CIP) and the MTEF.
           May 2005:        Meeting to discuss and adopt final draft of the IDP.

5.2.3   COUNCIL MEETINGS

           November 2004: To adopt DRAFT IDP document.
           June 2005:     Council adoption of the IDP for 2005/6.




                                                                                           9

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Stats:
views:7
posted:12/5/2009
language:English
pages:9
Description: PROCESS PLAN FOR THE SECOND YEAR OF THE IDP REVIEW