Johannesburg - Parents in inner-city Johannesburg, especially those in high-density areas such as the CBD, Berea, Hillbrow and Yeoville, face a huge challenge in finding suitable schools for their children.
Earlier this year Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga confirmed that 1 500 pupils were not placed in schools, with some schools using church venues as classrooms.
This is not a new problem, says Angela Rivers, the GM of the Johannesburg Property Owners and Managers Association (JPOMA), which provides accommodation in the affordable housing sector where many of these families live.
Despite over 50 000 new housing units having been developed in the Joburg inner-city over the past 15 years, not a single new school has been built by the Department of Education.
JPOMA is very aware of its tenants’ education conundrum and has objected to COJ’s Draft Rates Policy for 2023/2024 regarding private schools in which they are recategorised from “schools” to “business and commercial” and therefore to be charged massively higher rates for municipal services.
“In just one example, if you look at CityKidz Pre & Primary School in the CBD, the rates cost is likely to increase from R888 per month to R8 886, an increase of 900%,” says Rivers.
“Helping those schools who are providing a service which the city is failing to do, should be priority. Especially in the light of Minister Motshekga’s confirmation that there is a shortage of classrooms in more than 8 000 schools, with a total of 70 000 additional classrooms required. The National Council of Provinces (NCOP) in May this year stated that Gauteng needs as many as 142 new schools – 85 primary and 57 secondary schools – to clear the backlog.”
The NCOP further reported, she says, that 723 of the 2 207 schools in the province currently have a shortage of 5 554 classrooms – of which 3 166 are primary schools and 2 388 are secondary schools. There are also challenges with regard to current school infrastructure in disrepair, teacher shortages, and overcrowded learning spaces.
“It is hard to fathom what the Treasury was thinking when, despite this dire and well-documented school shortage, it decided to remove the ‘school’ category and implement the higher business and commercial tariff on educational facilities. Instead of encouraging private schools to assist alleviating the school crisis, they are now being disadvantaged,” she argues.
What concerns JPOMA is that there has clearly been no differentiation between private schools operating for profit, many of which are owned by listed public companies, and those schools operating as not-for-profit institutions.
“Several of these schools were established specifically to address the schooling crisis. Schools such as CityKidz Pre-Primary School, Vuleka School, Bill Cross College, Gem Meg School and JW Saints School, among many others, provide a social schooling service and charge the lowest fees possible. These not-for-profit schools struggle to survive financially,” says Rivers.
Most not-for-profit schools are in degraded or impoverished areas, with limited space, and deal with the various social issues prevalent in these areas, she explains.
“There is a constant battle to keep costs down and they do not have the ‘private-school’ luxury of rugby fields, cricket pitches and/or swimming pools, for example.”
To keep them afloat, most independent social-initiative schools apply for a state subsidy, but it is a lengthy process with various compliance documents and processes, she adds.
“The awarding of a subsidy is contingent on the school showing proof of further compliance with the Norms and Standards for School Funding that provides national guidelines to the provincial education departments, which administer the subsidies.
JPOMA is recommending that a clear distinction is made between private schools operating for profit, and those schools set up as an independent social initiative, operating as not-for-profit institutions and established specifically to address the schooling crisis.
“We believe that any independent social-initiative school that is receiving government subsidies should get a 100% rebate on their rates. The government subsidy confirms that the fees are not ‘private school’ fees and should not be treated as such.”
For schools in this category that don’t receive government subsidies but can prove that their fees are not for profit, JPOMA recommends that these should get 80% rebate on their rates.
“In the city’s current financial state, the much-needed schools or extra classrooms will not be coming from government or municipality,” says Rivers. “It will fall on the private sector to fill the gap once again. And through the new rates categories that COJ is proposing, the private sector is being punished for assisting in educating students. This proposal should be scrapped, and the least that COJ can do is to adopt a more accommodating approach to those private entities that are making an effort to compensate for the City’s own inefficiencies.
“Council needs to put our disadvantaged children ahead of the drive to increase revenue generation.”