Sunday, November 07, 2010

Kabwe town clerk ‘improperly’ awards land survey contract

Kabwe town clerk ‘improperly’ awards land survey contract
By Maluba Jere
Sat 06 Nov. 2010, 03:59 CAT

KABWE town clerk Vivian Chiwila Chikoti has allegedly awarded a contract worth over K700 million to a local land surveyor for the survey of plots without following procedure.

And Chikoti has allegedly disregarded advice from the director of finance at Kabwe Municipal Council (KMC) on the awarding of a contract which is above the institutional tendering threshold of K500 million.

In a memorandum to the director of finance dated August 30, 2010, Chikoti stated that the council under resolution number PWD/126/01/2010(b) agreed that William Mhango of Geopractica be engaged to survey all the plots.

The memorandum was also copied to Kabwe mayor and all chief officers at KMC.

“…engaged Mr William Mhango a registered land surveyor to survey plots in Kabwe that were advertised and formally allocated to successful applicants last year because the public who were interviewed in November/December, 2009 have waited for too long to be allocated the plots in Mulungushi, Mukobeko, Natuseko and Katondo site and service,” read the memorandum in part. “

Chikoti stated that Mhango had already surveyed some plots and was demanding payment of K24 million, adding that the release of these funds should be expedited to enable the surveyor proceed with the works.

According to documentation obtained by The Post, the contract worth K778,100,000 signed on September 1, 2010 has been awarded to Mhango who is expected to execute the works by February 6, 2011.

The contract states that payments would be made in part upon certification of the works by the director of engineering and social services or any other person so appointed by the council upon demand.

The contracts also state that the surveyor would be paid 58 per cent of the total fees whilst the council would retain 42 per cent of the total fees.
It further indicates that the contract may be terminated in the event of breach of any part of the contract.

“If the employee is in breach of any part of this contract, the employer may terminate the contract without incurring any liability for any payment in addition to that already made or agreed to be made,” it stated.

But KMC director of finance Kate Leo Mukonde wrote to Chikoti saying she had difficulties to proceed to pay Mhango for the works because the quoted amount was above the institutional tendering threshold of K500 million and that the contractor has been awarded a contract sum of K778 million without going through tender procedure.

In a letter dated September 3, 2010 addressed to Chikoti, Mukonde stated that she had difficulties paying the said surveyor because he was single sourced by the director of engineering contrary to procurement procedure.

She also explained that the director of engineering should not have had a part in the contract signing because he was the requisitioning officer.

“According to the contract agreement, the provincial local government officer will play the role of arbitrator in case of a dispute and will make final and binding rulings on both parties,” Mukonde stated. “However, since Kabwe Municipal Council is a corporate body capable of suing and being sued, it is only the court of law that can act as an arbitrator in cases of dispute.”

Mukonde further stated that the contract sum was not budgeted for and that it had a huge impact on the budget adding that it was not approved by the council.
She noted that the contract sum was K778 million while the same agreement stated that the surveyor would be paid 58 per cent of the total fees without specifying which fees nor what that percentage translated to in monetary terms.

“It is also stated in the contract agreement that the contract sum of K778.1 million must be paid within six months from the date of agreement, 1st September, 2010 or by 6th February 2011. I wish to advise that there is no reasonable assurance that this amount will be raised or available for payment to the contractor as agreed,” Mukonde stated.

“If the assumption is that the contract sum will be paid from survey fees, I wish to advise that survey fees unlike developmental charges are paid as and when the developer feels it necessary to pay or when the developer wishes to develop the plot.”

Apart from advising Chikoti on the concerns regarding the contract, Mukonde also sought further guidance on how to proceed.

But in response to Mukonde’s concerns, Chikoti in a memorandum dated October 10, 2010 stated that she had noted her concerns as well as her refusal to pay.
She explained that she sought legal advice on the matter and established that Mukonde’s refusal to pay was unjustified because the issues raised by her Mukonde should have been originated by the chief internal auditor while she should have harmonised the situation since the council had already given Geopractica Ltd authority to survey the plots in question.

“I take this opportunity to remind you that this council has collected huge sums of monies in form of development charges and those individuals who have paid are now demanding to be shown the plots allocated to them but this is not possible because the land in question has not been surveyed,” Chikoti stated.

“This situation has put unnecessary pressure on the council which could have otherwise been avoided if you had released part payments to the surveyor appointed by the council.”

Chikoti directed Mukonde to find an alternative solution to the impasse within 48 hours and that failure to do so would leave her with no option but initiate disciplinary proceedings against her.

Both Mukonde and Chikoti were not available for comment by press time.

Labels: , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home