As Johannesburg battles financial pressures, property owners are increasingly burdened by inflated valuations that impact their municipal rates. In an interview with Alec Hogg, BizNews community members Rene Kilner and Charles Boles unpacked the city’s flawed valuation appeals process, detailing its significant repercussions for residents, particularly pensioners. Despite attempts to appeal these skyrocketing valuations, both Kilner and Boles reveal that the system appears heavily skewed in favor of municipal revenue generation, leaving many property owners with few options but costly litigation.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
The seventh BizNews Conference, BNC#7, is to be held in Hermanus from March 11 to 13, 2025. The 2025 BizNews Conference is designed to provide an excellent opportunity for members of the BizNews community to interact directly with the keynote speakers, old (and new) friends from previous BNC events – and to interact with members of the BizNews team. Register for BNC#7 here.
Watch here
Listen here
BizNews Reporter
___STEADY_PAYWALL___
As the City of Johannesburg faces mounting financial strain, its recent property valuation adjustments have sparked deep concern among residents, who argue that the process lacks transparency and fairness. In an interview with BizNews, community members Rene Kilner, an energy company owner, and property investor Charles Boles detailed their experiences in the city’s property valuation appeals hearings. Both Kilner and Boles raised questions about the objectivity of the appeals process, suggesting that the city’s motives are driven by its urgent need for revenue rather than genuine market reflections.
Kilner, who regularly assists clients with municipal tariff and valuation disputes, noted the staggering increases in property valuations, particularly in neighborhoods like Parkhurst. She highlighted that independent professional valuers consistently assessed properties at between R9,200 and R15,000 per square meter. However, Johannesburg’s valuation board attributed values ranging from R15,000 to R19,000 per square meter, often disregarding the property’s age, condition, and market context. “The city needs money, and jacking up valuations seems like a quick fix,” Kilner said. She expressed frustration that the appeal board, which is supposed to operate independently, often dismisses objections from professional valuers, instead upholding the city’s valuations without providing clear justifications.
Boles echoed these sentiments, comparing the current valuation cycle to the previous one in 2018. Back then, the city outsourced the valuation process to an independent firm, which he said allowed for a more balanced approach where external valuation reports received appropriate weight. “Now, the independent valuation reports seem almost disregarded,” Boles observed. He described the city’s approach as less transparent, relying on minimal data from comparable properties without giving residents insight into how values are determined. In one instance, the city used an Excel spreadsheet to display valuations of comparable properties but failed to clarify critical aspects, such as whether properties were new or older structures. According to Boles, without a transparent process, the valuations presented by the city do not provide a realistic view of property values in the market, leaving residents blindsided.
Read more: Frans Cronjé: The GNU, US Election, how SA can flourish with Trump’s America
Kilner further highlighted that inflated valuations hit pensioners hardest, particularly those who rely on rebates to make their homes affordable. With higher valuations, pensioners risk losing these rebates, pushing some into financial precarity and, ultimately, forcing them to sell their homes. “These overinflated rates mean pensioners could lose their primary asset and have to relocate to old-age homes they can’t afford,” she said, describing the situation as “appalling.”
When asked about possible remedies, both Kilner and Boles pointed to the limitations of the city’s appeal process, which they described as a “show trial” with no real pathway for relief. Kilner mentioned that if an appeal is unsuccessful, the only recourse is to take the case to court, a financially impractical option for most homeowners. She suggested that organizations such as OUTA or AfriForum might need to investigate the city’s practices, citing the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act as potentially applicable to Johannesburg’s valuation tactics.
A recent city tactic that has complicated the process further is the issuance of Section 52 notices. Kilner explained that if a valuation adjustment of more than 10% occurs, property owners are required to appeal, even if the adjusted value is acceptable. Failure to appeal allows the city to revalue the property at any point within the next five-year valuation cycle. For many residents, this means enduring a relentless process of objections and appeals, with the potential for valuations to be arbitrarily reset higher by the city’s property department.
Both Kilner and Boles argue that the process is fundamentally flawed and in need of reform. “This system is setting property owners up for failure,” Boles stated, emphasizing the city’s perceived prioritization of revenue over fairness and transparency. The interview highlighted the urgent need for an independent oversight mechanism to ensure that valuations align with actual market values, rather than serve as a revenue-generating tool.
For Johannesburg’s homeowners, the prospect of stable, fair property rates remains uncertain as the city continues to seek revenue sources amid financial pressures.
Read also:
