Mayor should pick his city manager

MANDLA RADEBE of Norkem Park writes:

The article in Kempton Express on November 3, headed “Only ANC members have say in who becomes new city manager”, surprised me.

For an effective municipal structure, the municipal manager (MM) should report to and form an integral part of the mayor’s management team. In other words, a mayor must seek his own team player and appoint them in that position.

In the private sector, the CEO reports to the chairman and the board but the relationship with chairman is crucial for the company to function well. Therefore the relationship between the mayor and the municipal manager is crucial.

The article reveals a few things to note about the appointment of our municipal manager:

• A committee or panel has been established to appoint the manager. This may be a requirement from the council policy or labour law directive, but the mayor is the executive head of the metro and the MM will lead his operational team.

The committee is only effective if the mayor instructs his party’s people in it, to appoint someone he wants – which essentially renders the committee irrelevant. The appointment must give him his preferred candidate, therefore the multi-party committee exists to ‘bless’ his preferred candidate’s appointment; their views don’t matter and they shouldn’t.

• There are stated processes that the committee need to follow. I’m not sure how formal these are and with which law, they have to comply. In all fairness however, if there are policies to be adhered to, adhere to them irrespective of your majority.

It is barbaric to breach policies because there is a majority power exercisable; keep things professional. Indisputably, there is no such thing as professional politics, so seek guidance where needed. The former mayor was once pulled into court, for allegedly extending the former MM contract by another term illegally. Therefore, using politics when policy guidelines exist, can be costly for the metro.

• There seems to be a requirement for gender and racial diversity in the shortlisted candidates – on top of qualifications, experience and employment equity requirements. This is a standard procedure for most positions.

At face value, the municipal workforce convincingly consists mostly of what is called people from “designated groups”: ie. black Africans, Indians and Coloureds. Some of them occupy very senior positions, which is good.

My opinion is that when you are looking for an MM, you want the best in the land, to run a smart developing and prospering city. Therefore “gender and racial diversity” is adequate, instead of limiting and contradicting the criteria to “designated groups”.

• Lastly, the opposition complains that only the ANC has the say in the appointment. There are two mistakes in this. One: if I were in an opposition party, I would not participate in the appointment process.

Two: if I were the mayor, I would stress the importance of assembling my own MM, providing I appoint him properly. When Helen Zille took over the City of Cape Town for the first time, Nomanindiya Mfeketho (the mayor before her) left her an unpleasant surprise.

She extended a contract of the then MM, Wallace Mgoqi, by another term – a term she arrogantly banked on winning before elections. The contract ended in court with serious and costly implications for the city.

If appointment by committee is law, my view is, it is wrong. The mayor should be allowed to appoint his own team. Directors General in the national government are appointed that way.

All I can say at this point is: may the mayor’s real favourite win. The last thing we need is an appointment that will be open to costly legal challenges and to spend working days in court.