Fabricated Statements About the Number of Complaints Received About the Welcome Garden

Post 4 – 02 February 2026

1. This post, together with upcoming posts, will show how the WCID Board and Operations Manager, have, since April 2025, made false and exaggerated claims, with no substantiating documentation, to justify their unilateral decision to change the Approved Term 2 Business Plan, 4 months after the Business Plan was approved by the members. In the words of Anika Nel, the Board Chairperson, it was their “right”.

2. This post will show that, without exception, the claims made by the Board and Operations Manager, such as, “due to public demand” and being “inundated with complaints”, are false and fabricated.

3. Since April 2025, Cheryl has tried every means available to her to obtain information and documentation from the Board and Operations Manager. Cheryl has addressed mails to the Board Chairperson, the Operations Manager, submitted PAIA requests, all of which were met with refusals, obfuscations, arrogance, dismissals, and the Board Chairperson even reneging on commitments she made at the 04 August 2025 meeting.

4. Ultimately, on 2 September 2025, after 5 months, having exhausted all avenues available to her, Cheryl escalated the matter to the Information Regulator. The information obtained will be set out in this and upcoming posts.

5. The matter is still ongoing with the information Regulator, as the Board and Operations Manager have still refused to provide the requested information.

6. At the public meeting held on 04 August 2025, Cheryl asked the Board Chairperson, Anika Nel, how many complaints had been received with respect to the Welcome Garden.

7. The Board Chairperson replied that there were “lots”, but didn’t know the number. Cheryl persisted, and the Board Chairperson undertook to check, and revert back to Cheryl.

8. On the 21st August 2025, 17 days later, Hessel Turkstra sent Cheryl a WhatsApp asking if the Board Chairperson had replied yet. Hessel was therefore of the opinion that the Board Chairperson was supposed to reply. Cheryl advised Hessel that no reply had yet been received.

9. Eventually, on 26th August 2025, a further 5 days later, the Board Chairperson replied saying that, as public participation was not required for certain Business Plan changes, there was no reason for her to respond to Cheryl’s query. This, despite Cheryl’s query being totally unrelated to community participation. Cheryl wanted to know how many complaints there were about the Welcome Garden, which had nothing to do with public participation.

10. After Cheryl’s further ongoing attempts to get the number of complaints, on the 28th August 2025, yet another 2 days later, the Board Chairperson finally responded, stating that the number of complaints received was 16, which she claimed excluded complaints which were verbal, on WhatsApp, people who wanted to remain anonymous, etc. The Operations Manager and the Board therefore had a record of only 16 complaints.

11. To have determined that there were 16 complaints, the Board Chairperson and Operations Manager must have counted them.

12. Last year, six complaints had been addressed personally by a Board member at the time, Steve Minnaar. Steve spoke personally with each of the complainants. After completing the engagements, 5 of the 6 complainants withdrew their complaints, as they now understood the planting strategy. It is not clear whether the 6 complaints addressed by Steve formed part of the 16 complaints claimed by the Board Chairperson.

13. After Steve had engaged with the 6 complainants, he wrote to the Board giving them feedback on the outcome of the engagements. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this feedback has not been disclosed.

14. Cheryl submitted a PAIA request to the Operations Manager and the Board, for copies of the 16 complaints.

15. Cheryl’s request was REFUSED.

16. Having now exhausted all options available to her, Cheryl then escalated the matter to the Information Regulator on 2 September 2025. The Operations Manager and Board replied to the Information Regulator on 02 December 2025, stating:

    “The WCID Complaint register is available on the WCID website at
    https://welgemoedcid.co.za/framework-wcid/#Governance”
    (See attached Schedule of PAIA request and outcomes – POST 4)

17. At the time, and till today, there is not a single complaint relating to the Welcome Garden, or a complaint related to locally indigenous, or endemic planting, registered in the Complaints Register on the WCID website. See Addendums 6 and 6A.

18. In addition, the complaints that are listed provide no detail regarding the complaint, no detail of the resolution of the complaint, just vague, generic statements. An example is the complaint of 22 September 2025 about unsafe swings. The resolution listed is “Regular cleaning plans shared”. This response in no way addresses, or provides the resolution to the complaint.

19. For the record, Cheryl reported the unsafe swings to Willem Myburgh of the Parks Department at the City of Cape Town, and told the Operations Manager that she had reported the matter to the CoCT.

20. We do know that there were at last 6 complaints, as Steve Minnaar personally spoke with the complainants, and then submitted written feedback to the Board on the matter. For Steve to be able to contact the complainants, he must have been given the complaints and the contact details of the complainants. Till today, none of these complaints are posted on the Website, and for some strange reason, neither the Operations Manager, Board appears able to do so, or provide copies of the 6 complaints, the 16 complaints.

21. The Board and Operations Manager claim that there were verbal complaints. Were these made at a braai, in passing, at an encounter at the shops, or by telephone call? If so, where were the complaints recorded, how were their addressed and what was the resolution? Was a complaint about the untidy state of the Welcome Garden, or about the plants? There is simply no information available, yet the Board and Operations Manager used these claims to change the Approved Term 2 Business Plan, 4 months after the Business Plan received “overwhelming support” from the members at the 2024 AGM.

22. As the complaints do not exist, it is not possible to establish whether the complaints related to the untidy state of the Welcome Garden, which resulted from a lack of maintenance due to a lack of capacity, or were the complaints about the plants. There are no records. We are simply told that “For proof of this, you will have to re