By Patience Gondo
THE Municipality of Beitbridge has referred back to its Health and Housing Committee a compensation claim for foundation trenching and transport for sand and quarry by a beneficiary allocated a stand that had already been allocated to another person.
The double allocation of residential land has raised concerns over procedure, accountability and possible irregularities.
Rembulwani Chibi, centres her claim from council on a disputed stand under layout plan GD261/1 and asked council to trench a foundation she claimed to have made in preparation to build.
In the claim, Chibi also requested council to transport river sand and quarry stones from the double allocated site to a newly provided one, over and above support in trenching the foundation for constrution to begin.
But councillors said the issue had to be approached with care with questions over the legitimacy of the claim and warning against being used without proper verification of ownership documents.
One councillor queried whether the plans she used to trench were duly stamped for approval, while another said the issue required further scrutiny before any commitments could be made.
Ward 2 Councillor Portia Shumba councillor proposed to refer the matter to the responsible committee for thorough investigation, a position supported by Women’s Quota Councillor Angeline Tauya.
Adding to the concerns, Women’s Quota Councillor Brenda Maworere questioned how such an anomaly could occur, pointing to the role of inspectors in monitoring developments and ensuring compliance at every stage of land occupation.
“How is it that a person could even reach the stage of someone pegging on a stand already allocated?”
Ward 4 Councillor Emmanuel Takutaku also weighed in, calling for professionalism within the housing department and expressing concern over record management.
“It is my understanding that we keep records of all stand beneficiaries. How then can we have a double allocation in this digital era?” he said.
Takutaku said, while he supports compensation in principle, it must be handled fairly.
“Now that the mistake is upon us, I am not against compensation, but it should be done fairly, on a 50/50 basis. No party should be prejudiced,” he said.
The issue was ultimately referred back to the Health and Housing Committee for further assessment, with councillors expecting a comprehensive report to clarify the allocation process, verify documentation and recommend an equitable resolution.