Is Joburg giving electricity users a break or just playing politics?

The City of Johannesburg’s recently released draft budget for 2025/26 claims to bring stability and relief for electricity users. But the numbers and narratives don’t add up beneath the surface, and residents have every right to be sceptical.

At the centre of the confusion is the controversial prepaid surcharge. Officially introduced last year amid public outcry, it deducted around R230 from residents' monthly recharges before they even saw a single unit of electricity. Many were blindsided. This year, the city says it won’t increase this charge, but is that really good news?

The draft budget proposes “unchanged” service charges: R70 for residential prepaid (High) users and a R200 network capacity charge. But here's the catch: the current network capacity charge is R130, not R200. This glaring discrepancy would mean a real increase if left uncorrected. Thankfully, City Power clarified that the total fixed charge remains R200, split between R70 and R130. Yet the fact that this error made it into the official draft raises questions about the competence or intentions behind the proposal.

Are these errors just sloppy accounting or deliberate obfuscation? How many residents would have noticed without public scrutiny?

Mayor Dada Morero stepped in to assure residents that the availability charges would not increase, and that the budget and tariff reports would be withdrawn for revision. That’s a welcome intervention, but why did it take media pressure and public outrage to prompt it? And if the mayor is truly committed to affordability, why retain a fixed monthly charge for prepaid users, many of whom are low-income households using minimal power?

Prepaid electricity is, by design, a pay-as-you-use model. Adding a monthly fixed fee defeats its purpose. Should residents be penalised with a R200 surcharge just for access, especially when conventional meter users are charged differently?

Meanwhile, the budget proposes a 12.51% electricity tariff hike, higher than the 11.32% approved by Nersa for municipalities. Morero claims this figure aligns with Eskom’s 12.74% increase for direct customers, but that’s misleading. Are city officials inflating figures to justify overcharging, or are they simply confused?

This entire episode underscores a troubling pattern: inconsistency, lack of transparency, and policy decisions that seem reactive rather than responsible. If Johannesburg wants to restore public trust, it must go beyond headline promises and ensure that every rand charged is fairly justified and clearly explained.

Why do municipal leaders continue to push regressive electricity fees while claiming to protect vulnerable households? And how many more "errors" will residents be expected to catch on their own before accountability becomes the norm?

Pikolomzi Qaba I Joburg