The Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) council office.
Credit: DH Photo
The Government of Karnataka is set to bifurcate the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) into smaller corporations and an apex body, the Greater Bengaluru Authority.
This move comes in response to Bengaluru’s rapid growth, necessitating a transformation in the administrative structure of the corporation. The rationale is clear: splitting the city into smaller parts for better administration.
This idea is not new; the government has previously considered splitting the corporation and setting up a restructuring committee to re-envision the BBMP’s structure. The committee has reportedly submitted the draft Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill to the government.
The perception that BBMP is too large and ungovernable for a city like Bengaluru is untenable. While the city is growing rapidly and faces numerous issues due to unbridled urbanisation, splitting the corporation may not be a practical solution.
The key issues BBMP faces today are financial accountability and over-centralization in decision-making processes. The existing structure exacerbates these problems by creating another layer of administration: the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA).
The GBA, proposed to be led by the chief minister and co-chaired by the Bengaluru development minister, will include the heads of all parastatals such as the Bengaluru Development Authority, Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB), and Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL), among others. This authority will take city-level decisions on projects and departments, cutting across the boundaries of multiple corporations, such as major roads and storm water drains.
The GBA being a state government-dependent authority raises concerns as it will control city planning and development activities that should be within the purview of the BBMP and other allied agencies, in direct violation of the 74th Amendment.
This also leaves certain questions unanswered: Are these parastatal agencies accountable to the city government or only to the state government? A 2020 report by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on the Performance Audit of the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act pointed out that parastatals have eroded the autonomy of the urban local bodies in implementing their core functions, including urban planning, water supply, and land use regulation.
Additionally, the GBA’s fund allocation process may result in excessive centralisation, as it aims to distribute state and central funds based on the financial needs of corporations. Shouldn’t the GBA then be headed by an elected mayor? If Bengaluru is to be modelled on London, then the Greater London Authority (the London equivalent for BBMP), chaired by the London Mayor, provides a better comparison than having the chief minister head the GBA.
The case of Delhi is also relevant here. The fragmentation of the Municipal Council of Delhi (MCD) led to economic disparity between the East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC), North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC), and South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), with one part of Delhi thriving at the expense of another.
In 2022, the MCD eventually merged into a single, unified body due to a financial crisis. While the Bengaluru model claims to be different from Delhi’s trifurcation model in terms of distributing finances and creating an additional layer above the corporations, it fails to consider numerous other issues that may arise. For instance, differences in policies among Delhi’s corporations led to inconsistent stances on mandatory registration with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) for construction projects above 500 sq m. Such concerns may also arise with BBMP in the event of a split.
What the BBMP needs is a mayor and a functional council. Since September 2020, Bengaluru has been without an elected body. The lack of elected corporators leads to unresolved issues, with no meetings to address citizens’ concerns and no accountability mechanism for the BBMP. Adding another body to the mix is not a solution to the long-standing problem of lack of coordination, as evidenced by the creation of the Bengaluru Metropolitan Land Transport Authority, which has not even been constituted despite the enactment of the BMLTA Act in 2022.
Saying that the city’s expansion necessitates more corporations implies that future expansions will require even more corporations. Instead, the existing bodies will be more effective if their authority is appropriately ascertained. Simple replication of foreign models is not feasible, especially given the differences in hierarchies and decision-making processes, fundamentally pointing to the fact that most of these bodies work in silos. It is acknowledged that independent corporations can meet the needs of people residing within their boundaries.
However, the existing BBMP can aim for democratic decentralisation and increase municipal accountability, principles that are crucial to the effective functioning of the municipal body.
(The writer is a Senior Resident Fellow at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, Bengaluru)