In my line of work, conducting oversight of the City of Johannesburg, I am often asked whether Joburg can be saved – and whether it should be.
The daily headlines tell one story: Egoli has lost its shine. Knowing what I do about the City’s financial position, infrastructure backlogs and repeated service delivery failures, I should be among the most pessimistic people in Johannesburg.
Instead, I see every day how residents, businesses and community organisations are preventing the city from collapsing. People are rolling up their sleeves, building partnerships and taking responsibility for the spaces around them.
The Braamfontein Improvement District is a powerful example of what is possible.
The difference between a managed City Improvement District (CID) and the surrounding areas is often glaring. As an example, in Braamfontein, the daily work of cleaning streets, reporting leaks and faulty traffic lights, improving public spaces and creating initiatives such as the Ameshoff Street revival has helped keep urban decay at bay.
And there are many more spread across the city’s seven regions doing the hard work needed to keep these precincts viable spaces for people to live, work and play.
These interventions do more than make an area look better. They help create safer, cleaner and more functional neighbourhoods. They encourage investment, support businesses and make public spaces more accessible. Most importantly, they create a sense of inclusion and optimism that reflects the real character of the City of Gold.
CIDs work. Johannesburg needs more of them.
The value of organised communities became especially clear in 2023. Johannesburg was rocked by the Lilian Ngoyi Street explosion, the deadly fire at the City-owned Usindiso building and the closure of the Metro Centre.
‘Not in my name’
Faced with these failures, the people of Johannesburg did not simply sit back. They said: not in my name.
I was volunteering for my local residents’ association at the time. Historically, residents’ associations may have been associated with church fêtes and neighbourhood security initiatives. Today, many have become the front line of service delivery.
They are adopting parks, repairing libraries, reporting failing infrastructure and helping residents through prolonged water and electricity outages. In my community, that has included installing backup water tanks.
In September, the Lonehill Residents Association crossed a major milestone by signing an MOU with the City that allows the residents association to repair potholes on City roads within its suburb.
Many other associations and organised groups are keen to follow their lead and we at JoburgCAN are actively assisting them in this process.
The obvious complaint is that this amounts to double taxation. Residents already pay rates, service charges and national taxes, yet many must also pay privately for security, healthcare, education, backup electricity and increasingly their own access to water.
For many households, these alternatives are completely unaffordable. The growth of community-led services should never be used to excuse the City from fulfilling its responsibilities.
Resilience
But it also demonstrates the resilience of Johannesburg’s people. Communities are refusing to allow a failing system to stand in the way of their survival or the city’s recovery.
I am part of the Presidential Johannesburg Working Group, an intervention involving national, provincial and local government, alongside civil society and business. Its work covers the City’s finances, water, electricity, roads, waste, safety, housing, heritage and the rejuvenation of the inner city and townships.
There are no genuinely quick wins in Johannesburg. Its problems are historical, complex and deeply entrenched. Progress in several areas has stalled, and concerns about the transparency of the working group are justified.
However, one conclusion from our numerous inspection walks, particularly through the inner city, has been unmistakable: managed precincts make a measurable difference.
Despite the public benefit created by CIDs, Johannesburg has not yet established the sustainable framework needed to support and expand them.
Special Rating Area
That is why JoburgCAN has been pushing the City to finalise its Special Rating Area policy.
A Special Rating Area would allow an additional charge to be collected through municipal rates accounts within a defined area, with the revenue used to fund agreed services and improvements in that precinct. This would provide CIDs with dependable funding while ensuring that all qualifying property owners contribute to the benefits they receive.
It would reduce the problem of some property owners benefiting from cleaner streets, improved security and better-managed public spaces while leaving others to carry the cost.
The City should now complete the policy, provide certainty and create a workable route for more communities and business districts to establish sustainable CIDs.
We should also explore formal agreements that allow capable improvement districts to do more. With the right oversight and clearly defined responsibilities, these partnerships could help maintain infrastructure, protect public spaces and develop practical solutions suited to individual precincts.
These are the changes that can make a real, long-term difference to Johannesburg.
Co-governance
Many residents are waiting to see what happens at the ballot box in November. Elections matter, but the future of Johannesburg will not be secured by a purely political solution. The work of rebuilding the city must continue between elections and will require government, businesses, residents and organised communities to work together.
Co-governance is central to JoburgCAN’s model. It works when strong relationships are established with the people inside the City who remain committed to public service and when communities are treated as partners rather than passive recipients.
Should Johannesburg be saved? Absolutely.
It remains the economic heart of South Africa, and its failure would have serious consequences far beyond its municipal boundaries. But there is also something unique, vibrant and deeply human about this city that cannot be measured only in balance sheets or infrastructure reports.
Can Johannesburg be saved? I believe it can. DM
Comments
Scroll down to load comments...
Facts Only
* The author conducts oversight of the City of Johannesburg.
* Residents, businesses, and community organizations are preventing city collapse through collective action.
* The Braamfontein Improvement District serves as an example of possible outcomes.
* Interventions in areas like Braamfontein include cleaning streets, reporting leaks, improving public spaces, and the Ameshoff Street revival.
* Community interventions create safer, cleaner, and more functional neighborhoods.
* Residents' associations are adopting service delivery roles, such as installing backup water tanks.
* The Lonehill Residents Association signed an MOU with the City allowing them to repair potholes on City roads within the suburb.
* Johannesburg faced events including the Lilian Ngoyi Street explosion, a fire at the Usindiso building, and the closure of the Metro Centre in 2023.
* The author is part of the Presidential Johannesburg Working Group, which covers finances, water, electricity, roads, waste, safety, housing, heritage, and inner-city rejuvenation.
* JoburgCAN is assisting organized groups in local service delivery processes.
* A Special Rating Area policy would allow an additional charge on municipal rates to fund agreed services for CIDs.
Executive Summary
The author discusses the state of Johannesburg through the lens of community action and municipal governance. The text posits that residents, businesses, and community organizations are actively mitigating city decline by taking responsibility for their local environments, exemplified by initiatives like the Braamfontein Improvement District (CID). These localized interventions, such as street cleaning and public space improvements, contribute to safer, cleaner neighborhoods and foster a sense of optimism in the city.
The text then addresses the growing role of organized communities, noting that residents’ associations are increasingly acting as frontline service providers by addressing infrastructure failures and securing alternatives for essential services like water and electricity. A central tension is introduced regarding the cost, suggesting that community-led services should not excuse the City from fulfilling its responsibilities.
The author points to systemic failures evidenced by recent incidents and the broader context of the Presidential Johannesburg Working Group, which addresses city functions across various sectors. The piece concludes by advocating for structural changes, specifically pushing for a Special Rating Area policy to provide reliable funding for CIDs, exploring formal agreements for improvement districts, and emphasizing the necessity of co-governance to ensure long-term recovery.
Full Take
The narrative operates by establishing a contrast between systemic failure and localized resilience, framing the discussion around power distribution. The core tension lies between the City's institutional capacity (or lack thereof) and the agency asserted by organized communities. The shift from viewing residents as passive recipients to recognizing them as active partners—the concept of co-governance—is central.
The piece implicitly challenges the established hierarchy where municipal failure is attributed solely to systemic issues, while simultaneously arguing that localized action is a necessary, demonstrable form of progress. The proposal for a Special Rating Area functions not merely as a fiscal mechanism but as a structural lever to rebalance accountability and resource allocation within the city framework.
A critical pattern emerges in how failure is contextualized: problems are labeled "historical, complex, and deeply entrenched," which serves to deflect immediate blame from current administration while legitimizing long-term demands for systemic change. The concept of CIDs functions as a successful, bottom-up model that exists in parallel to, and often challenges, the top-down municipal structure. The analysis suggests that true recovery requires integrating these localized successes into a formal, funded, co-governed framework rather than treating them as ancillary achievements.
Bridge Questions: If CIDs demonstrably improve public spaces and safety, what specific institutional barriers prevent immediate, large-scale adoption across all seven regions? How can the framework for co-governance be established in a way that ensures the funding mechanism (like the Special Rating Area) is democratically controlled by the communities themselves rather than being dictated solely by municipal administration? What are the long-term political risks associated with formalizing these community-led structures versus maintaining centralized control over city resources?
Sentinel — Human
This text functions as a persuasive essay rooted in personal experience, using local case studies to argue for specific governance and community structures, displaying strong human-authored intent.