Joburg’s opaque plans to ‘alienate’ parks and other facilities has ratepayers seeing red

The term of art is “alienate” and that sums up how Joburg’s long-suffering ratepayers feel about opaque moves by the Johannesburg Property Company (JPC) to sell, transfer or alter the leasing arrangements with several iconic parks and facilities designated for public use.

The City of Johannesburg council’s 25-26 June meeting agenda included items referring to the possible “alienation” (release or sale) of several properties managed by the Johannesburg Property Company (JPC). 

Besides Marks Park in Emmarentia, sites listed included Pirates Sports Club, Killarney Country Club, and properties in Zoo Lake and Parktown. This language led many to believe the city was poised to sell or privatise large swathes of treasured recreational land, which also has significant ecological value.

A widely circulated petition, supported by community members and descendants of the original land donors, has already attracted 8,888 signatures, with 96% in support at the time of publication. It demands that the city and JPC withdraw the agenda item and guarantee public recreational use of the land.

Anchen Dreyer, a great-granddaughter of Louw Geldenhuys, said that the land is currently zoned as Public Open Space, and the petition argues that any move to alienate it would flout both the donor’s intent and multiple legislative protections.

“Where we’re standing right now is a heritage area,” said Dreyer, standing in front of what is now the Marks Park clubhouse. “It’s not only my and my many cousins’ heritage, but it’s also the heritage for all the people of Johannesburg.”

She said the land was bequeathed “... to the people of Johannesburg for their use and enjoyment as a public open space ... it’s not up to the city to decide to sell it or long lease or develop it… it was donated to the people of Johannesburg.”

Read more: Joburg power crisis — almost 100,000 reported outages in 9 months, 5,126 very serious

The city says, no sale – yet

Responding to the backlash, Sizeka Tshabalala, General Manager at JPC, said there is “no truth” to the claim that the city intends to sell major parks such as Marks Park, the Botanical Gardens or Emmarentia Dam.

“What we’re doing is reviewing old lease agreements, some extremely outdated,” she said. “We’ll only consider new arrangements after a transparent public participation process.”

Tshabalala pointed out that many of the current leases are financially outdated: Marks Park pays R49 a year, while Killarney Country Club pays just R2.

JPC and the city are asking for council approval to start a public consultation process. If approved, residents will be asked to weigh in on how underused assets like Marks Park could be “maximised”.

Julia Fish from JoburgCAN, a division of the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse, confirmed that, at present, there is no immediate plan to sell or redevelop Marks Park or any of the other green spaces mentioned.

Fish explained that the lease for the main tenant (Protea Academy) at Marks Park is believed to be ending soon, though there is some disagreement about the exact timing.

Because Marks Park is a valuable property (worth more than R10-million), the City and Joburg Property Company (JPC) are proposing to start a public participation process. This means they are asking the city council for permission to begin consulting the public about what should happen next.

“We want investment and development into our parks to make them safe, but the way the city has conducted [itself], trying to seek every cent it can out of communities… there’s no trust there,” said Fish.

Read more: Mayor, bomb squad go AWOL as hundreds of thousands of Joburg households go without water – again

What about the broader greenbelt?

Concerns have centred on all 173 hectares of Portion 33 of the Farm Braamfontein, not just Marks Park. 

“In an updated document, JPC explicitly refers to the site as 173 hectares, when Marks Park itself constitutes barely two hectares. This discrepancy raises serious concerns,” said Nicolene Jonker, DA councillor for Ward 88.

“The city has already classified Marks Park as a ‘non-core capital asset’ and recommended it be sold or leased long-term, with redevelopment suggested for private uses.”

Fish clarified that while Marks Park was managed as part of this consolidated property, the immediate consultation related only to club and park facilities, not to the zoning or fate of Emmarentia Dam, Melville Koppies, or the Botanical Gardens. If any changes were to be proposed for those sites, they would require thorough legal, environmental and public consultation steps.

“While ostensibly neutral, the supporting documents make the intention plain: the city has already classified Marks Park as a ‘non-core capital asset’, recommended that it be ‘sold or leased on a long-term basis’, and suggested redevelopment of portions for high-density housing, multi-functional sporting facilities, medical suites, and other private uses,” Jonker said.

Community mistrust

The city has argued that some land parcels may not be achieving their “full benefit potential or commercial value” – a statement that has raised alarm among residents.

There is growing fear that the city might use terms like “untenable occupation” or “lack of investment” as a pretext to commercialise Joburg’s public open spaces.

Many residents suspect the city is more focused on commercial “maximisation” than preserving ecological, recreational and community value. 

This mistrust is not unfounded. Past experience, as with the Parkhurst Bowling Club, has seen properties abandoned due to high rents, allowed to become derelict or illegally occupied, then later proposed for far more commercial-intensive development. 

While some private entities have helped restore green spaces through park adoption schemes, Fish warns that over-reliance on commercial partnerships could erode their public purpose.

“We genuinely understand the lack of trust and the deficit of goodwill from residents towards the city and its processes, given other developments,” said Fish. “But at this time, and with the facts in front of us, we have not reached a point to believe there is an imminent sale or large built environment development touted for Mark’s Park.”

‘Misinformation can weaken the community’s position’

Fish says the current council item’s primary purpose is to seek approval for a public participation process, not to authorise sale or development. She urged residents to stay informed and involved when the time comes for public consultation:

“Misinformation can weaken the community’s position,” noted Fish. “We need to be vigilant, but also wait for the official process to open so all views can be heard and the best use of these spaces can be determined together with the city.”

No land use changes or lease decisions have been finalised. City officials say all properties will be considered individually and that no alienation or new lease agreements will proceed without robust legal compliance, transparent engagement and clear public communication.

When asked when and where the public participation would take place, JPC spokesperson Lucky Sidane told Daily Maverick: “​​As soon as council approves the public participation process. We are waiting for council approval.”

But councillors have complained that the JPC is acting as if it’s simply ticking the boxes.

“They are asking for public participation as if alienation is already a foregone conclusion. That is not how public participation is meant to function under the Municipal Systems Act,” Jonker said.

During a two-hour meeting on Wednesday with the JPC, Jonker asked the company to produce the Surveyor-General diagram defining the precise portions to be alienated. She said it could not do so.

Strapped for cash, the perception is that the JPC is embarking on a rent-seeking land grab, and ham-fisted attempts at “communicating” intentions are simply adding fuel to the flames of public distrust.

What can civil society do?

If the council approves the JPC’s request, a public participation process will be officially launched. At that stage, residents, clubs and interested groups can weigh in on whether Marks Parks’ status, use or management should change.

Fish encourages all stakeholders to take part and urges the public to be informed through official and trusted community channels, sign the petition if they wish to send a message and engage vigorously in all future public participation opportunities.

“There is a process, and even if we believe that process is flawed, that process gives us power,” said Fish. DM