The provincial government of KwaZulu-Natal has decided to extend the 2018 resolution to place the Uthukela district municipality under administration.
The extension will run until December this year, and it comes amid fresh service delivery challenges, including water provision and corruption allegations against senior staff members and politicians.
The decision to place the municipality under administration for a prolonged period is contained in a letter dated July 2 2025. It was written by the MEC for cooperative governance and traditional affairs (Cogta), Reverend Thulasizwe Buthelezi, to the Speaker, Lihle Nqubuka.
Underspending on grants
Buthelezi said Nqubuka should on Friday this week convene a special council sitting for this decision to be officially communicated to the council and senior staff. Among the reasons Buthelezi said was cited by the provincial government, is underspending on grants.
“Reasons for intervention: community protests over lack of service delivery (Ekuvukeni and Valkop); Labour disputes/protests and vandalisation of infrastructure; Poor state of infrastructure – (exceeding design capacity and in poor condition); Lack of WSA technical capacity and skills; Extensive water losses; Lack of capacity to undertake water and sanitation functions; Qualified audit opinion – (weak financial management controls); Financial challenges (unfunded budget, low collection rate, consumer debt, high employee costs, non-payment of creditors, grants not cash backed, and UIFW); and underspending on capital grants,” reads part of Buthelezi’s letter to Nqubuka.
The issue of unspent grants has come to the fore. DA Councillor Thys Janse van Rensburg said the municipality is on the verge of losing R122-million in unspent grants. These include grants for water infrastructure.
Future allocations and viability threatened
“As of May 2025, over R112-million remains unspent or uncommitted. This puts uThukela at risk of National Treasury reclaiming the funds under the Division of Revenue Act, weakening its financial position further and threatening future allocations and viability.
“Compounding this crisis is a reported decline in revenue collection. This has plummeted from 60% at the start of the IFP’s tenure to an unsustainable 40%.
“This collapse, driven by ongoing poor service delivery, has eroded public trust. It is prompting residents to withhold payments. Insufficient revenue has strained operational budgets. This led to the misuse of capital grants for operational expenses, such as salaries, rather than their intended infrastructure projects.
“This has caused significant delays in payments to contractors. It stalled critical capital projects and exacerbating the municipality’s financial woes,” Rensburg said.
In response, the municipality claimed, without producing any evidence, that Rensburg relied on outdated figures to reach his conclusion.
Outdated figures
“These assertions, based on an April report and not the latest figures, misrepresent the municipality’s financial position and performance.
“To set the record straight: Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG). As of 30 June 2025, expenditure stands at 88%, with the final claims currently being processed.
“This will take total expenditure to 103%. Water Services Infrastructure Grant (WSIG). Contrary to the DA’s claim of only 56.9% commitment, current expenditure is 70%, with expected invoices in hand that will bring total expenditure to 96% once processed. These invoices constitute committed expenditure, as per National Treasury guidelines,” the municipality claimed in its response.
