Accountability regarding the ward committee and CLO’s [LETTER]
That practice is not in keeping with the principle upon which CLO appointments are made, namely, to benefit as many different indigent individuals within a ward.
EDITOR – Transparency and accountability are the guiding principles of governance.
On several occasions in the past year, requests for details about the ward committee in ward 66 have been made. None have been forthcoming. Yet it now transpires that the ward committee has been officially disbanded as a result of resignations and would have to be replaced. The question is; what process would be applied, co-option or public election?
Similar concerns surround the appointment of community liaison officers (CLO’s). Each municipal project in a ward is supposed to have a CLO. Although in ward 66 there are and have been at times multiple projects on the go and the same CLO has been appointed to all of them simultaneously.
That practice is not in keeping with the principle upon which CLO appointments are made, namely, to benefit as many different indigent individuals within a ward. The appointment of a CLO is the responsibility of the ward councillor. Why has councillor JP Prinsloo not adhered to that guideline? By appointing the same CLO to simultaneous projects it raises the question of political collusion. In any event, it flouts the guidelines of transparency and accountability.
As a ratepayer, I seek responses to these concerns and have approached eThekwini Municipality about the situation.
JASON JOHNSON
The Sun publishes letters: Accompanied by the writer’s full name, address, telephone number even if you use a nom de plume. Letters may not be over 200 words, the editor reserves the right to shorten or amend letters.
Send your letter to: Fax 031-903-5756 • PO Box 88, Toti, 4125 • southlandssun@dbn.caxton.co.za
