With the attainment of independence in 1963, Kenya inherited a dual administrative structure consisting of local authorities (LAs) and de- concentrated administrative units collectively known as the provincial administration. This
dual structure remains the framework for local
governance and decentralised service delivery, together with additional decentralised fund- ing flows and decentralised regional and local agencies.
The first regional development initiative in Ke- nya covered six administrative divisions under
the Special Rural Development Programme
(SRDP) in 1967. However, because of its sectoral focus, the SRDP could not adequately achieve its goal of promoting rural development. More- over, the government at that time also sought
to strengthen the local government system alongside the general move towards decentra- lised governance in the country. As part of this process, Sessional Paper No, 12 of 1967 was developed and consequently the government
accepted to revitalise LAs with reliable sources
of revenue including grants.
LAs were initially responsible for the provision
of a wide range of services including primary
health care, primary education, water sup- ply and roads. However lack of resources and limited institutional capacity led to poor per- formance and in 1969 health and education responsibilities were taken from County Coun-
cils and primary and secondary roads were re- moved soon afterwards. This was done under the Transfer of Functions Act, 1969 whereby major services including primary schools, health services, road maintenance and their attendant financial resources were transferred to central government, except in seven munici- pal councils, namely; Nairobi, Mombasa, Thika, Eldoret, Kisumu, Nakuru, and Kitale. The resul- tant effect was a further weakening of local authorities. The net effect also was that during the 1970s and 1980s local government stag- nated with central Ministries taking the lead-
ing role in the delivery of services through the
deconcentrated offices. This situation was fur- ther compounded in 1974 when the Graduated Personal Tax was transferred to central govern- ment and at the same time general grants by central government to local authorities were abolished.
In light of the dwindling revenue sources of
Local Authorities Institutional, Legal and Policy Reforms
LAs something needed to be done. The govern- ment opted to appoint a task-force led by a Mr Stanley Nyagah. The report of the task force, produced in 1974 recommended a package of far-reaching financial reforms but cautioned
that such reforms would not succeed unless
issues of structure, functions and powers of
LAs were addressed and aligned with those of
the Central Government. There is no evidence that any of the recommendations were imple- mented.
The Omamo Commission of Inquiry of 1995 examined the key features and operations of
the LAs and recommended the strengthening of LAs through:
Promoting a participatory approach to •
local government
Enhancing local government’s capacity, •
both in terms of human resources
and functional streamlining
Promoting a collaborative and effective •
Central-Local Government linkage
Again, there is no evidence that these recom- mendations were implemented. However, it
led to the review of the Local Government Act
and the establishment of the (Kenya Local Gov- ernment Reform Programme (KLGRP) in 1996.
The mandate of KLGRP is to coordinate the
initiation and implementation of reforms in the local government sector. In the process, KLGRP also develops and disseminates policies, sys- tems and procedures relating to local govern- ment.
From an institutional perspective, KLGRP oper- ates as a department of MoLG and is staffed by civil servants and led by a programme co-or-
dinator who reports directly to the Permanent
Secretary. Besides public funding and techni- cal support, KLGRP has continued to receive external technical assistance over the years. For instance, initially this technical assistance came through the World Bank (from 1998 to 2004) but later from the Department for Internation- al Development (DfID, UK) from 2004 to 2006, and currently from the European Union under the Rural Poverty Reduction and Local Govern- ment Support Programme, 2006 to 2010. As part of execution of its reform agenda, KLGRP has been seeking to address, among other things, issues relating to poor governance and low capacity to deliver services, inad- equate revenue mobilisation by local authori- ties, dependency of local authorities on central government, weak financial management, and
weaknesses in partnerships and stakeholder
development, and in decentralisation policy and strategic and physical planning. While
some aspects of these initiatives are ongoing
some achievements have been made on some
fronts. For instance as discussed elsewhere in this chapter, resourcing of local authorities has been improved with introduction of initiatives such as single business permits, Local Author- ity Transfer Fund, use of financial management information systems and development of im- proved governance and financial management procedures and guidelines.
As part of buttressing the financial base of local authorities to improve their service de- livery, the government established a service
charge that was levied on all employees and
organisations including business entities. Ad- ministration of this service charge was prob- lematic as it was deemed as an unjustified tax given the low levels of service delivery by LAs.
This levy was dropped and the government in
1998 established the Local Authorities Transfer Fund (LATF) and the Local Authorities Service Delivery Action Plans (LASDAP). LATF became operational in 1999 under the LATF Act No. 8 of 1998. Under this Act 5% of national income tax is allocated to local authorities. These monies
are provided as budget support and are spent
as per the local budget priorities as identified
through the LASDAP process which entails con- sultations with communities.
The government has also been involved in a
process of decentralisation of central govern- ment functions. In the process, local authori- ties co-exist with decentralised government
departments and as a result this has also meant availability of more resources at the local lev- el. The above is especially true in the case of county councils which cover administrative
districts and thus serve more or less the same
population. The City Council of Nairobi serves the same people served by the administrative Nairobi province. This could be said to consti- tute a parallel decentralisation process. Vari-
ous reforms have been adopted that support
varied aspects of administrative decentralisa- tion. This parallel system of decentralisation involves central government ministries, state corporations, and regional development agen- cies in deconcentrated or delegated activities. Further to this, there has been a significant
movement in recent years to the channelling of local service delivery resources to the con- stituencies. Of significance is the constituency development fund which has also supported, especially, infrastructure development within most local authority areas of jurisdiction and thus augmenting service delivery.
Devolution has been clearly articulated as a policy objective in the Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation
1ERS (2003) was a policy framework, entitled an ‘Economic Recovery Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation’. The strategy was adopted by the government to spur growth and economic recovery following a period of low eco- nomic performance in the late 1990s and early 2000
2The Kenya Vision 2030 is the strategic choice taken by the government to Marshall resources guided by a long term vision so as to transform the country into a middle income nation by 2030
(2004)1 and the Kenya Vision 20302 (2007). In the Kenya Vision 2030, local authorities have been identified as key deliverers of the identi- fied programmes. Consensus on the nature of
the desired devolved system has not however
been reached, though it is anticipated that the current Constitutional Review Process will pro- vide a clear direction in this area.
Chapter 6.2 of Vision 2030 on Decentralisation of the Medium Term Plan identifies the follow- ing programmes and projects for implementa- tion in 2008–2012:
Developme
• nt of a decentralisation
policy
Development of a decentralisation stra- •
tegic framework
Reforms of local authorities including •
a refinement of the Local Government Act and all laws, which reinforce central management functions over those stra- tegically suited to LAs.
Capacity building in local authori- •
ties: A comprehensive training needs
asessment will be carried out for Local
Authorities with a view to developing a national programme for the training of local authorities’ staff.
Information, Education and Communi- •
cation.
These key strategies provide a clear recognition of the need for strengthened local authorities as key deliverers of the Kenya Vision 2030. It is from this recognition in national policy that the
Local Government Reform Programme draws its authority and the framework within which
its strategies have been developed, including
the Local Government Sector Reform Strat- egy of 2009, which applies the objectives and strategies of the Kenya Vision 2030 to the Local Government Sector.
It is however critical to note that the Local Gov- ernment Act Cap. 265 is under review and a bill to that effect is before the National Assembly as The Local Government (Amendment) Bill,
2009. The proposed amendments, if the bill is passed, will see local authorities energised
as there are proposed reforms therein such as
having mayors become the executive heads of local authorities. It also proposes that the may-
or and chairmen of councils be directly elected
into office and thus become accountable to the citizens. Equally, the revised harmonised draft constitution of Kenya has provisions that are likely to dramatically affect local governments.
There are proposals to establish county gov- ernments and the operationalisation of these
will possibly change the landscape of local
government. Thus local government reforms are on-going and indeed local authorities are
at a point where there is so much happening
that are likely to affect The Local Government (Amendment) Bill, 2009.