The municipal manager of Makhado Municipality and three senior managers reporting directly to him will receive performance bonuses after the council approved their annual performance assessments last week.
The bonuses, amounting to R408,778.13 in total, were approved during the municipality's 194th Special Council meeting on 28 May. The approval followed a recommendation by the municipality's Executive Committee on 26 May.
The municipal manager will receive a bonus of R130,537.26. The Director of Community Services and Director of Corporate Services will each receive R98,202.66, while the Director of Development Planning will receive R81,835.55.
Municipal regulations allow for the annual assessment of municipal managers and managers reporting directly to them. Employees who achieve certain performance ratings may qualify for bonuses ranging from 5% to 14% of their all-inclusive remuneration packages.
According to the assessment reports, all four officials scored within the 130% to 149% performance range. Three received bonuses equal to 6% of their remuneration packages, while the Director of Development Planning received 5%.
Only the DA and EFF opposed the approval of the performance bonuses, but to no avail, as the ANC-led council approved the recommendation.
In his objection, Cllr Pierre Smalle, acting as chief whip for the DA during the meeting, said residents and ratepayers had experienced poor service delivery throughout the past year.
“Certain streets remained overgrown, roads were not swept or properly maintained, and unplanned electricity outages became a daily occurrence in many areas. The overall state of service delivery does not reflect an administration performing ‘significantly above expectations’ or ‘outstandingly’,” said Smalle.
Smalle further bemoaned the fact that the documents provided to councillors contained no detailed KPIs or measurable targets against which the Section 57 managers had been assessed.
“Only the final results were presented. Council cannot properly evaluate or verify these assessments without transparency regarding the actual performance indicators used,” Smalle said.
He added that it was difficult to justify ratings such as a score of four for Local Economic Development (“significantly above expectations”) and a score of five for Financial Management (“outstanding performance”) “when the lived reality of residents and businesses reflects ongoing service delivery failures”.
Smalle also referred to the mayor’s response to a previous request for a Rates and Services Relief/Amnesty Programme for struggling residents and businesses, in which the mayor had stated that “It’s not advisable as the municipality is recovering from an unfunded budget.”
“If the municipality is financially constrained to the extent that relief for residents cannot be considered, then it cannot simultaneously justify the payment of performance bonuses to senior management,” Smalle said.
He said the DA believed the funds should instead be redirected towards improving service delivery, infrastructure maintenance, electricity stability, road maintenance and visible operational improvements that directly benefit the public.
“Performance must ultimately be measured against the actual condition of the municipality and the quality of services delivered to ratepayers,” said Smalle.
The municipal manager receives a total remuneration package of R2,175,621 per year. The Director of Community Services, Director of Corporate Services and Director of Development Planning each receive total remuneration packages of R1,636,711.
Municipal performance regulations provide that officials who score between 130% and 149% may receive bonuses of between 5% and 9% of their remuneration packages, while those scoring 150% or higher may qualify for bonuses of between 10% and 14%.