The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Johannesburg has rejected the proposed adjustment budget, saying it will continue to fight for a budget that prioritises service delivery and the long-term financial stability of the City of Johannesburg.

The proposed adjustment budget failed to pass in council, with the DA and Freedom Front Plus voting against it, while ActionSA and the Economic Freedom Fighters chose to abstain.

DA Johannesburg Caucus leader Belinda Kayser-Echeozonjoku said the DA would not support an adjusted budget that placed employee costs above service delivery.

“Johannesburg’s finances must be protected so that every available rand goes towards addressing the City’s infrastructure crisis and improving the lives of residents,” she stated.

Earlier this week, the DA served the City with legal papers demanding that the Politically Facilitated Agreement (PFA) be removed from the budget owing to several inconsistencies and the “significant financial risk” it poses to the City.

The party believes that the inclusion of the PFA will place an unsustainable financial burden on the municipality and ultimately bankrupt the City, diverting critical funds away from much-needed service delivery to residents.

Kayser-Echeozonjoku pointed out that as Johannesburg faced an infrastructure backlog, residents expected responsible governance and a budget that prioritised service delivery.

“Instead, the current administration has attempted to push through a budget that prioritises escalating employee costs and political agreements over the needs of residents,” she said.

GOOD national chairperson Matthew Cook noted that the adjustment operating budget raised several serious concerns about the financial direction of the City of Johannesburg.

Cook pointed out that the adjustment budget showed employee-related costs increasing by R1.35-billion, while spending on contracted services was reduced by more than R1-billion.

He highlighted that financial sustainability required transparency, disciplined budgeting, and strong oversight, stating that council must ensure that the City’s finances were managed in a way that protected services and built confidence among residents and businesses.