Counties trapped in consumption as development stalls
The revelation by the Controller of Budget Dr. Magaret Nyakang’o that several county governments failed to spend a single shilling on development projects in the first quarter of the 2025/26 financial year is more than a budgeting anomaly, it is a damning indictment of the state of devolution.
More than a decade after counties were established to bring services closer to the people, many have degenerated into consumption units obsessed with salaries, allowances and overheads, while development grinds to a halt.
According to the County Governments’ Budget Implementation Review Report for July to September 2025, counties collectively spent just Sh3.69billion on development, only two per cent of their annual development budget. This dismal absorption rate exposes a chronic and systemic failure that has persisted year after year, regardless of political leadership, party affiliation or economic conditions.
At the heart of the problem is a skewed spending culture. Counties continue to prioritise recurrent expenditure wages, travel, hospitality, fuel, sitting allowances and other administrative costs over investments that generate tangible benefits for citizens. In many counties, recurrent expenditure consumes over 70 per cent of total budgets, leaving little room for roads, water projects, health facilities, markets or irrigation schemes.
This pattern defeats the very purpose of devolution. Counties were not created to merely replicate the bureaucracy of the national government at a local level. They were meant to unlock grassroots development, address regional inequalities and spur local economic growth. Instead, they have become bloated payroll centres where political elites and administrators extract value, while ordinary wananchi see little improvement in their daily lives.
The failure to spend on development is often blamed on delayed disbursement of funds from the National Treasury, procurement bottlenecks or pending bills. While these challenges are real, they have become convenient excuses masking deeper governance weaknesses. Poor planning, weak project prioritisation, lack of technical capacity and outright mismanagement continue to plague county administrations.
Many counties pass ambitious budgets that are detached from reality. Projects are scattered thinly across wards to appease political interests, resulting in stalled or incomplete initiatives that never reach completion. Others deliberately delay development spending to the final quarter of the financial year, creating a rush that compromises value for money and opens the door to corruption.
Political incentives also work against development. Recurrent expenditure offers immediate and predictable benefits to those in power salaries, allowances and contracts while development projects require time, discipline and transparency. Roads and water projects do not pay allowances, but meetings, workshops and foreign trips do.
The consequences of this imbalance are visible across the country. Health facilities lack equipment, rural roads remain impassable, markets are unfinished, and water projects stall despite repeated budget allocations. Counties with huge development needs are effectively stuck in a cycle of stagnation, unable to transform their local economies or improve service delivery.
This failure has broader economic implications. Development spending has a multiplier effect it creates jobs, stimulates local businesses and improves productivity. When counties underinvest in development, they undermine national growth and worsen inequality. Youth unemployment persists, rural economies stagnate and public frustration deepens.
The Controller of Budget’s report should therefore trigger more than public outrage; it should force a serious rethink of how counties are governed. Stronger oversight by county assemblies, stricter enforcement of fiscal responsibility laws and consequences for persistent underperformance are long overdue. Counties that repeatedly fail to absorb development funds should not be allowed to roll over excuses indefinitely.
There is also a need to rethink the structure of county administrations. Kenya may simply be carrying too many layers of political and administrative overheads at the expense of service delivery. Without reforms to rein in wage bills and non-essential spending, development will remain an afterthought.
Ultimately, devolution will be judged not by the size of county budgets but by the quality of life it delivers. Roads built, water supplied, hospitals equipped and livelihoods improved are the true metrics of success. As long as counties continue to prioritise consumption over investment, devolution risks being remembered not as a tool for transformation, but as a missed opportunity.
The warning signs are clear. If counties do not urgently reorient spending towards development, they will continue to fail the very people they were created to serve.
By Adieri Mulaa
The author is a seasoned journalist and expert in Devolution.
