City of Cape Town Is Selling “Relief” While Locking in Higher Bills

GOOD Statement by Sandra Dickson, GOOD City of Cape Town Councillor:

The GOOD Party is calling out a consistent pattern under the current administration: saying one thing to residents but implementing another, then presenting it as if nothing has changed.

On the one hand, the Mayor continues to reassure residents that the City is protecting them, promoting water-saving, and driving affordability. On the other hand, the 2025/26 tariff reforms, now reinforced through the adjustment budget, quietly entrench a system where residents are charged based on property value, not actual water usage.

You are told to use less, but you are billed as if you didn’t. That is not a misunderstanding but a contradiction.

The shift from infrastructure-based charges to fixed charges linked to municipal valuation fundamentally changes how residents pay for water services. It moves the City away from a usage-based model toward one that guarantees revenue regardless of consumption. And this is where the problem deepens.

The adjustment budget confirms what residents are already experiencing. While consumption is being managed and reduced, revenue is being stabilised and protected through fixed charges. In simple terms, the less you use, the less it matters. That is not resilience. That is revenue engineering.

The City will argue that fixed costs must be recovered. That is correct. But what they cannot explain is why the cost of maintaining water infrastructure must now scale with the market value of your home.

There is no clear, direct relationship between the value of your property and the cost of supplying water to it. What exists instead is a policy choice, one that shifts the burden onto residents in a way that is increasingly detached from actual service use. And yet, residents are being told this is for their benefit. That is the gaslighting.

In 2018, Capetonians rejected a property-based drought levy. Today, the same principle has been reintroduced, not as an emergency measure, but as a permanent feature of the City’s tariff structure, repackaged under the language of “climate resilience” and “reform.” Different label. Same outcome.

Even more concerning is how this model treats responsible residents. Those who invested in water-saving systems, reduced their reliance on municipal supply and responded to the City’s call during the drought are now facing higher fixed costs simply because their property value increased.

That is not fairness. That is a system that rewards the balance sheet, not the behaviour the City claims to encourage.

The legal question is clear: tariffs must be equitable and proportionate to the cost of service. A model that increasingly disconnects billing from actual usage, while tying it to property value, raises serious concerns under the Municipal Systems Act.

If the City has chosen to move toward a wealth-linked billing model to secure its revenue base, it must say so openly. What it cannot do is continue presenting this shift as relief, sustainability, or fairness while residents experience the exact opposite on their accounts.

The GOOD Party will continue to support legal and public challenges to these tariffs because, at its core, this is not just about water. It is about trust.

And right now, that trust is being eroded, one carefully worded budget speech at a time.

GOOD Ministerial Role: Patricia de Lille serves as the Minister of Tourism in the national government.

Read More at the Source