1 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Municipal Systems Act No. 32 of 2000 stipulates that all municipalities prepare an Integrated Development Plan (IDP) for their areas of jurisdiction. The Act also calls for the preparation of Process Plans for the monitoring of the major milestones of the IDP process as it progresses. The IDP, is a single, inclusive strategic plan for the municipality that: Integrates and co-ordinates service delivery within a municipality, forms the general basis on which annual budgets must be based, aligns the resources and capacity of the municipality with the implementation of the plan, assists a municipality in fulfilling its constitutional mandate as developmental local government, and facilitates the process of democratisation through vigorous public participation. In compliance with the Act, the Ugu District Council took a resolution on the 11th of July 2001 to embark on the process of preparing an Integrated Development Plan. The Council’s intention was to develop a written plan that would promote sustainable growth and contribute towards the provision of adequate physical infrastructure and equitable opportunities for all the inhabitants of the District with specific focus on the poor and the marginalised. A professional team led by the Municipal Manager, consisting of the municipality’s heads of department, together with the Planning and GIS Unit was assigned the task of preparing the Integrated Development Plan. Udidi Development Planning Consultants who prepared the IDP’s Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Stewart Scott who prepared the Water Services Development Plan (WSDP) supported the planning process. The Water Services Development Plan and the SEA data were fed directly into the IDP as it unfolded. The consultants preparing these plans participated in the Task Team and Representative Forum Workshops during the planning process. 2 1.1 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS In order to ensure ownership of the process, the municipality opted to use the existing institutions as much as possible. The roles and responsibilities were thoroughly defined in the adoption of the Council Process Plan as shown in the table below. TABLE NO 1.0.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES DURING THE IDP PROCESS ENTITY RESPONSIBILITY Comment Municipal As the ultimate political decision-making body of the municipality, o Consisting of a total of 34 councillors with Council the Municipal Council had to: 20 of them are also local municipality o Consider and adopt a Process Plan councillors o Consider, adopt and approve the IDP Executive Committee o As the executive authority of the municipality, they had to: o Took various resolutions as per the o Delegate the overall management, co-ordination and recommendations of the steering monitoring of the process and drafting of the IDP, to the committee Municipal Manager o Approve nominated persons to be in charge of the different roles, activities and responsibilities of the process and drafting IDP Steering Committee o Consisted of the Planning and Environment Portfolio o Used the existing Planning and Committee of Council together with the IDP Manager and Environment Portfolio committee of Heads of Department, the committee had to: Council o Undertake the overall management and co-ordination of o Started meeting twice per month in 2001 the planning process and once a month in 2002 o Ensure that all relevant actors were appropriately involved o Chaired by a member of Exco o Ensure that the planning process was participatory o Made recommendations to Exco strategic and implementation orientated and was aligned with and satisfied sector planning requirements IDP Forum Consisted of representatives from all local municipalities and service providers, the forum had to: o Used the existing Service Providers forum o Perform all the project reference group functions o Chaired by the District Mayor o Link the Steering Committee with interested and affected o A total of eight forum meetings were held stakeholders o Provide a public and private sector input to the IDP IDP Manager The Ugu Municipal Manager as the IDP Manager had to manage and co-ordinate the IDP process. This entailed: o Used the Municipal Manager o Being responsible for the day- to-day management of the o In terms of the municipal organogram, the drafting process planning unit is located within the office of o Responding to comments on the draft IDP from the public, the municipal manager horizontal alignment and other spheres of government to the satisfaction of the Municipal Council o Ensuring proper documentation of the results of the planning of the IDP document. Heads of Department and As the persons in charge of implementing IDPs, the technical o Led some project task teams Officials and sectional officers had to be fully involved in the planning o Met once a week as top management process to: o Provide relevant technical, sector and financial information for priority issue analysis. o Contribute technical expertise in the consideration and finalisation of strategies and identification of projects o Provide departmental operational and capital budgetary information; o Be responsible for the preparation of project proposals, the integration of projects and sector programmes 3 Linkages amongst the structures were organised in a manner that is shown in the diagram below. DIAGRAM NO 1.01 IDP INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS AND INFORMATION FLOW UGU DISTRICT MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Ugu D. M Executive Committee Stakeholder and Community Participation Municipal Manager IDP District and Local (IDP Manager) Representative Level IDP Steering Forum Committee Stakeholder Structures, interest Local Project, Programme groups & Ward stakeholder and Sectoral Task Level Committees Teams The arrows in Diagram No 1 show the flow of information between the various stakeholders in the IDP process. The diagram was used as a framework for institutionalising the public participation and the decision-making processes. Furthermore, consultation at a local stakeholder level was synergised with the local municipalities planning processes in most instances. 4 1.2 UGU IDP APPROACH (PROCESS OVERVIEW) Phase 0: Preparation: The purpose of this phase was to define the following: How the planning process was going to unfold in all seven municipalities of the district? What specific actions were required? Who would be responsible for which actions? When would the actions have to be implemented? What would the actions cost? Whilst the framework plan was completed in time, the completion of the process plans took longer than anticipated. By the second week of August 2000, all municipalities had adopted their process plans. Phase 1: Analysis The decision was made that the analysis would on the one hand; take the form of a bottom up approach based on extensive consultation with communities within Local Municipalities. The Planning Division was actively involved in the community consultation processes and Representative Forum meetings of Local Municipality IDP’s. The district Planning Division conducted all the community meetings for the Analysis Phase of the Ezinqoleni Municipal IDP and assisted in facilitating the meetings of the Umzumbe, UMuziwabantu and Vulamehlo Municipalities. On the other hand, desktop analysis was undertaken with the intention of gathering “up to date” information from various sources. In addition, the Planning Division participated in the fieldwork conducted for the SEA. The intention was to gather first hand photographic material and to discuss issues emerging from the SEA with the consultants in the field and with communities during the feedback sessions. The Planning Division participated in the District Gender workshop to and convened the District HIV/AIDS Task Team workshop. The information gathered from this wide exposure to issues at community level was analysed and presented to the IDP Representative Forum for input and further clarification on an ongoing basis. 5 A Local Agenda 21 workshop was held with key stakeholders, decision makers and service providers on 13 November 2001. The final analysis information and photographic material was compiled and communicated to the public and local stakeholder structures between November 2001 and January 2002. A list of the advertised meeting venues is outlined on the table below. Vision statement work shopping was conducted with communities and fed back to the IDP Representative Forum for further refinement. Letters were sent to all service providers, NGO’s, CBO’s and the business sector requesting detailed input into the Analysis Phase. Table 1.0.2 SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT IDP COMMUNITY MEETINGS DATE MORNING VENUE AFTERNOON VENUE 10-12 – 2001 KwaHlongwa (7) KwaFica (130) 11-12 – 2001 Dududu Hall (11) Kenterton School (97) 12-12 – 2001 Thoyana Court (cancelled) Scottburgh (15) 13-12 – 2001 Uvongo (7) Port Shepstone (3) 18-12 – 2001 Harding (Re-scheduled) Ezinqoleni Town (37) 19-12 – 2001 Mayiyana School (84) 20-12 – 2001 Nyavini T.A (127) 07-01 – 2001 Harding (49) NB: The number in brackets is the total number of attendants at each venue Phase 2: Strategies The completion of this phase was marked by the formulation of the District vision elements by the IDP Representative Forum and the deliberations of the district wide strategies workshop held on the 28th and 29th of January 2002: In that workshop the following was achieved: Localised Strategic Guidelines were outlined and discussed. Creating, Analysing and Deciding on Strategic Alternatives / Best Strategies Institutional and Financial Draft Strategies were developed. Development of Strategic Guidelines on Barrier Free Access and the Development Spatial Framework. Identification of Development Projects Concepts 6 Attempted Alignment of Sector programmes through the design of the strategies worksheets. This was not as successful as had been anticipated. Formulation of Project Task Teams Terms of Reference. Phase 3: Projects Project Task Teams were formed at the Strategies Workshop and the various Task Teams as specified on Table 1.0.3 modified the identified projects. Projects were designed in the light of localised guidelines, strategies and objectives developed in the previous phase. Table1.0.3 SCHEDULE OF TASK TEAM MEETING IN UGU DISTRICT Date Task Team Municipalities Venue Cross- Sector Cluster 07-02-2001 Econ. Dev, Housing & Land Umdoni & Hibiscus 07-02-2001 Social & Physical Infrastructure Umuziwabantu & Ezinqoleni Oslo Beach 08-02-2001 Econ. Dev, Housing & Land Umuziwabantu & Ezinqoleni Oslo Beach 08-02-2001 Social & Physical Infrastructure Vulamehlo & Umzumbe Scottburgh 13-02-2001 Econ. Dev, Housing & Land Vulamehlo & Umzumbe Umzumbe 13-02-2001 Social & Physical Infrastructure Umdoni & Hibiscus Hibberdene Phase 4: Integration The integration workshop was held on the 11th and 12th of March 2002 in Port Shepstone. In this meeting, an evaluation and analysis of the draft spatial frameworks and project proposals from various municipalities occurred further comments from the service providers on both vertical and horizontal alignment of initiatives occurred. Further alignment of sector programmes was attempted since the workshop was designed especially for alignment. Although the meeting was well attended, the depth of alignment expected did not occur since some the budget allocations and detailed input required was not forthcoming. However all the proposed projects were discussed and accepted. Further individualised meetings and discussion between sector departments occurred. 7 Phase 5: Approval On the 28th of March 2002 the Council announced its intention to adopt the plan once the final comments had been made within the first 21 days of April 2002. The plan was accordingly adopted on the 25th of April 2002. 1.3 SELF ASSESSMENT OF THE PLANNING PROCESS There are five main comments that need to be made on a self-assessment of the Ugu Planning Process. Participation Due to the fact that the planning team was in-house, there was sufficient opportunity to maximise participation and consultation. The Planning and Environment Committee chairperson led this element of the process successfully. Both local newspapers and Ukhozi FM (a radio station that enjoys a listenership of more than 5 million people) were used to advance the IDP communication. The radio station was used on three occasions: During October 2001, for a period of four weeks, the IDP community meetings were announced every Tuesday. During December 2001, the IDP meetings in conjunction with the role of the municipality, was communicated daily for a week. On the 2nd of April 2002, the draft IDP was advertised for public comment via the radio and newspapers. Time Frames Whilst all municipalities accepted the framework plan and prepared their process plans accordingly, there was no compliance and adherence to time frames and this hindered the planning process pace. It is also submitted that the parallel and simultaneous planning process by category C and B municipalities proved to have some difficulties. 8 Government Support: The financial and technical support offered by the KZN – DTLGA throughout the process was sufficient and highly appreciated. A PIMS - Centre was established in the Ugu District after the process had started and its input into the process was very valuable. Institutional Support It is regretted that the planning process has reached the finalisation stage whilst there are very serious institutional/political decisions still outstanding. These inter alia include: The role of traditional authorities and the division of roles and responsibilities (competencies) between categories of municipalities. Information The simple and user-friendly guide packs that were used to guide the planning process were useful in offering methodological options. However local dynamics and circumstances in most instances dictated both the planning approach and process. 1.4 REPORT FORMAT National Government had provided guidelines for the preparation of Integrated Development Plans. It is comprised of the following elements: The Planning Process Situational Analysis Development Strategies Projects Integrated Sectors and Development Dimensions This report is based on the guidelines, and follows the structure and requirements outlined therein. The report is divided into three main parts: Main report which provides the required information in a narrative format encompassing explanation and relevant detail; and Annexures, which include maps, tables and detailed project sheets. This report also needs to be read in conjunction with the other three supporting documents viz: The Water Services Development Plan, The Local Municipality IDPs, and the Strategic Environmental Assessment.