Joburg's green heart under threat: Community battles city’s ‘alienation’ plans

Key topics:City proposes ‘alienation’ of public parks like Marks Park.Petitioners demand transparency, fear covert commercialisation plans.Critics say financial desperation drives rent-seeking behaviour..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.Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.The auditorium doors will open for BNIC#2 on 10 September 2025 in Hermanus. For more information and tickets, click here..By Kerry Lanaghan.Johannesburg residents are up in arms over what many see as a covert attempt by the city to commercialise some of its most iconic public parks and greenbelt areas. At the centre of the outcry is the Johannesburg Property Company’s (JPC) proposal to “alienate” properties such as Marks Park in Emmarentia - a term which, in municipal parlance, refers to the sale, transfer or change of leasing arrangements. But for residents, the word feels far more personal: alienation from the city’s green lungs and from the democratic process meant to protect them.As reported by Daily Maverick, the City of Johannesburg’s 25–26 June council agenda included proposals for the possible alienation of several high-profile public properties managed by the JPC. These include Marks Park, the Killarney Country Club, Pirates Sports Club, and land adjacent to Emmarentia Dam and Zoo Lake. The news triggered a strong public backlash, with nearly 9,000 people signing a petition demanding that the city scrap any such plans and guarantee the land remains in public hands.The heritage-listed Marks Park, part of a land donation made in 1939 by Louw Geldenhuys, is at the heart of this storm. “The land was gifted to the people of Johannesburg for their use and enjoyment,” said Anchen Dreyer, a descendant of Geldenhuys. “It’s not up to the city to sell or lease it for private development.”While the city insists that no final decisions have been made, residents and councillors are wary. JPC General Manager Sizeka Tshabalala told Daily Maverick that there is “no truth” to the idea that the city intends to sell the parks. Instead, the JPC is reviewing outdated lease agreements - some of which charge absurdly low fees, like R49 per year for Marks Park or R2 for Killarney - and is requesting council approval to begin a public participation process.However, critics argue that this is little more than window dressing. DA councillor Nicolene Jonker pointed to official city documents that classify Marks Park as a “non-core capital asset” and suggest long-term leasing or sale for private development, including high-density housing and commercial facilities. Jonker raised further concerns about a reference in updated documents to 173 hectares of land under consideration, far larger than the park itself, without clarity on exact boundaries. When she asked the JPC to produce official diagrams to define the land in question, the company failed.Community trust is understandably in short supply. Years of crumbling infrastructure, opaque governance, and financial mismanagement have made many Joburg residents sceptical of city-led initiatives. “The way the city has conducted itself, trying to squeeze every cent it can out of communities, means there’s no trust,” said Julia Fish of JoburgCAN, a civic group affiliated with the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (OUTA).The broader financial context, as captured in Currency News, helps explain why Joburg is eyeing its parks and public land as potential revenue sources. A recent Operation Vulindlela report revealed that municipalities like Johannesburg have essentially become “employment agencies,” diverting funds from service delivery to inflated bureaucracies. Since 2010, revenue from property rates has surged by 91%, and service charges by 101%, yet residents receive less for their money. Spending on salaries, meanwhile, has increased by 84%.Journalist Natasha Marrian, quoted in Currency News, put it bluntly: “Residents are paying for salaries, not services.” This extractive approach to municipal finance has left the city scrambling to plug holes, often through what critics call rent-seeking behaviour - aggressively monetising public assets without due process or respect for community ownership.Similar tactics have already imperilled institutions like the 138-year-old Rand Club, whose valuation was tripled in just two years, dramatically increasing its rates bill and threatening its survival. In this context, the city’s interest in redeveloping parks looks less like renewal and more like opportunistic asset-stripping.Yet while JPC insists this is merely a step toward public engagement, residents remain on high alert. “Even if the process is flawed, it gives us power,” said Fish. “We need to show up, speak out, and hold the city accountable.”No sale or redevelopment can proceed legally without a formal public participation process. However, there is concern that the process may be manipulated to legitimise predetermined outcomes. Jonker summed up this fear: “They’re asking for public participation as if alienation is already a foregone conclusion.”With Johannesburg’s parks on the line and its citizens increasingly vocal, what happens next may set a precedent for South Africa’s urban spaces being protected - or sold off - in an era of financial desperation.

Joburg's green heart under threat: Community battles city’s ‘alienation’ plans

Key topics:

Related Stories