What happened to Windhoek’s parks?

Why does the City of Windhoek still have a Parks Department if it cannot maintain the only park left in the capital?

And while we are asking uncomfortable questions, why are the Tintenpalast Gardens still closed to the public after more than a decade, ostensibly because of vaguely stated “security concerns”?

The Windhoek Observer in an earlier article wrote at length about that.

These are not merely questions about grass, gardens and flower beds. They are questions about what kind of city Windhoek wants to be, how public money is being used and whether public spaces are still regarded as essential municipal services.

Zoo Park was once more than a patch of greenery in the centre of Windhoek. It was a gathering place. Its amphitheatre hosted shows and television launches.

Families used the park. Young people gathered there. Residents had somewhere to sit, walk, relax and participate in public life.

Today, even the city’s chief executive officer, Moses Matyayi, has acknowledged that the municipality cannot guarantee safety in certain parts of the park.

That should be a profound embarrassment for the capital.

Appearing before a parliamentary standing committee, Matyayi warned that the municipality could not guarantee safety based on its assessment and that members of the public could potentially be injured, exposing the municipality to legal claims.

If a public park has deteriorated to the point where its own municipality warns residents about their safety, the question must surely be asked: where has the municipal parks management system failed?

More importantly, how long is the public expected to wait?

The municipality says it is pursuing landscaping and irrigation improvements and has advertised a tender to prequalify service providers for horticultural landscaping, greenery enhancement and irrigation upgrades over six months.

That is welcome.

But it is also difficult to ignore the fact that Windhoek has been discussing the rehabilitation of Zoo Park for years.

MP Vaino Angula reportedly questioned why the park’s amphitheatre has remained unused for more than 15 years.

Fifteen years is not a temporary setback. It is a generation.

A child who watched the amphitheatre fall into disuse 15 years ago is now old enough to have children of their own.

What happened?

And where is the accountability for allowing a public asset to deteriorate for so long?

There have been plans before. In November 2023, the City decided to enter into a memorandum of agreement with Innovate Group to coordinate private-sector financial or technical support for the renovation of Zoo Park.

The proposed arrangement reportedly included a maintenance component intended to reduce municipal maintenance and security costs over a decade.

Yet the public still does not appear to know whether that agreement was implemented, how much money was raised, what work was undertaken or why the park remains in its current condition.

Those are reasonable questions.

They become even more reasonable when historical figures show that the park generated less than N$15 000 in revenue in 2023, while security cost about N$12 000 a month and horticultural maintenance approximately N$25 700 a month.

Clearly, Zoo Park is unlikely to become a commercial gold mine simply by planting more flowers.

But perhaps that misses the point.

Public parks are not supposed to exist solely because they make money. They exist because cities need public spaces.

A functioning capital requires places where people can walk, exercise, meet, hold events, take their children and simply breathe.

And that brings us back to the Parks Department.

What exactly is its mandate? How many parks are being maintained? What is the annual budget? What are its performance indicators? How often are facilities inspected? Who is responsible when a public recreational facility becomes unusable?

The City has also advertised an expression of interest for feasibility studies into parks and recreational business opportunities across Windhoek.

Again, this is potentially useful.

But residents should not have to wait for another study to answer questions that should already be part of basic municipal management.

And then there is Tintenpalast.

For more than a decade, the gardens surrounding one of Namibia’s most important national buildings have effectively been unavailable as a public recreational space.

The explanation has generally centred on security.

But security concerns cannot become a permanent justification for closing public space without a transparent explanation of what those concerns are, whether they remain valid and whether alternatives have been considered.

Could controlled access work? Could opening hours be introduced? Could additional security measures be implemented? Could parts of the gardens be made accessible while protecting the National Assembly and government offices?

Namibians deserve answers.

The issue is bigger than Zoo Park or Tintenpalast Gardens. It is about a capital city that appears increasingly short of attractive, safe and accessible public spaces.

Windhoek cannot aspire to be a modern African capital while allowing its recreational spaces to decay and its potentially valuable public gardens to remain inaccessible indefinitely.

The City of Windhoek needs to explain what went wrong at Zoo Park, what happened to previous rehabilitation initiatives, what the current plan will cost and when residents can realistically expect to see results.

And the government needs to explain why the Tintenpalast Gardens remain closed and what would have to happen for the public to reclaim access to this important national space.

The public should not have to ask whether Windhoek still has a Parks Department.

It should be able to see the evidence of its work.