Pretoria - Unisa vice-chancellor and principal Professor Puleng LenkaBula was in no way involved in the renovations to her official residences in Pretoria, which incurred double the costs of the R1 million budgeted for it.
The university issued a letter to its stakeholders following media reports that LenkaBula had requested refurbishments to the official residence, Cloghreen, which it said was incorrect.
The information regarding the exorbitant expenditure was contained in a report titled “Consolidated progress report on the renovation of Cloghreen”.
In the letter, the university came to the defence of its vice-chancellor, indicating she had not been able to take occupation of the residency due to the delayed renovations and the unavailability of the handover report by the operations and facility portfolio.
The letter claimed LenkaBula made numerous attempts to get hold of the report, but to no avail.
According to Unisa, since taking office in January 2021, LenkaBula had been unable to occupy the residence because her predecessor, Professor Mandla Makhanya, had not vacated the premises, and only left in April last year.
Secondly, she was informed the property had gradually become dilapidated and was in need of renovations, some of which had to be approved by heritage authorities.
The university stressed that LenkaBula was at no point involved in the operational processes on the residence.
LenkaBula had allegedly only engaged with the relevant departments when she was consulted about her input on the attendant aesthetics of the residence.
The university further vindicated LenkaBula of any wrongdoing with regards to special overseas items which were allegedly requested, according to media reports.
"It is very important to state that at no stage did the vice-chancellor demand or request any overseas items. She was in fact not involved in the procurement processes or the project."
If anything, the university said LenkaBula was concerned regarding the continued delays and expressed her disquiet not only about the “slow pace” of the project, but of the high costs entailed in the quotations of the interior and household items, even as far back as May and August during site inspections.
The vice-chancellor not only raised her concerns about the project, but apparently took it further by an intervention to ensure that all quotations were be stopped and reviewed.
“She reiterated that she was not at all going to tolerate any superfluous spending in her name, and upon the handover of the house and keys on October 29, she conducted an inspection of the house.
“(She) was convinced that the renovations done did not warrant the exorbitant amounts incurred and required formal investigations,” read the statement.
To date, the report has, according to the institution, not been submitted as requested.
However, the university indicated that it would act against any of its employees found to have violated the policies by misrepresenting, falsifying information or unlawfully sharing personal and institutional information to unauthorised people over university information.
Pretoria News