Two Nakuru residents have petitioned the Nakuru County Assembly to suspend and revoke Nakuru’s city status charter, issued on December 1, 2021.
Ibrahim Karanja and Nakuru human rights activist Laban Omusundi said the city has lost the strict threshold regarding infrastructure and institutional capacity.
They claim Nakuru has drastically declined and can no longer sustain the metrics, and therefore deserves the demotion.
The two want the assembly to constitute an inquiry to establish whether the city meets the statutory and policy requirements
“The assembly should direct the county government to submit a detailed compliance report demonstrating how Nakuru satisfies the minimum requirements of a city,” they demand.
Further, they want the city charter suspended, until the leadership complies with the law and restore the city’s name, including providing basic service delivery to the required standards.
They want the MCAs to revoke the city status and reclassify Nakuru as a municipality until such a time when it meets the statutory threshold.
The two argue that the continued retention of Nakuru as a city was a mockery because of alleged persistent failure in governance and collapse of basic services.
“The situation in Nakuru city shows non-compliance with the legal and policy standards envisioned under the Urban Areas and Cities Act of 2011,” they state.
The two argue that the conferment of Nakuru to a city created a legitimate expectation among residents that it would enjoy enhanced service delivery.
Further, they claim that Nakuru residents expected modern infrastructure, proper planning, urban order, improved sanitation, adequate street lighting, security and reliable drainage systems.
The conferment led to the increase in levies, parking fees, land rates and rent, taxes, among others, with the residents bearing the burden.
The city status also meant that budgetary allocation would increase and investments, tourism and development would be of high standards.
However, they claim that Nakuru continues to experience decline in service delivery and urban management.
“Central Business District (CBD) and key access roads remain riddled with potholes, broken pavements, poor road signage and lack of structured pedestrian walkways,” they submit.
The petitioner say that the drainage system is ineffective, outdated or non-existent in many areas, causing flooding during rainy seasons, destruction of roads and exposure of residents to health hazards.
Street lighting, they submit, remains unreliable and in many parts of the city completely non-functional, thereby increasing insecurity, crime and reducing economic activity at night.
“Further, the city residents are vulnerable to fire incidents of lack of proper fire brigade vehicles, while existing ones remain broken down.”
The petitioners accuse the assembly of failing to ensure that a high standard of governance is adhered to and urge them to take their roles seriously.
Karanja and Omusundi claim that the city name has become a mere political title without measurable benefits.
The two further argue that under the Constitution, the status of a city must conform with its performance and service delivery.
“The charter is not permanent where the city fails to maintain the required standards, governance structures and service delivery and the assembly has a duty to protect residents,” they add.
“It is unconstitutional, irrational and against public interest for Nakuru to continue enjoying the city status while it does not meet the basic threshold of a functional urban governance system.”
The assembly has seven days to respond and 60 days to determine the issues, failure to which the petitioners will move to the Senate.
