Shanthinagar candidates make big promises

Transparency, accountability, citizen participation - the women contesting from Shanthinagar ward promised all this and much more at a recent public interaction.

"Women are more available and more transparent than the men," said Kathyayini Chamaraj, Secretary of Shanthinagar Residents Development Association (SHRED). With BBMP council elections just round the corner, residents of Shanthinagar (Ward 117) assembled to meet with the candidates contesting from their ward.

SHRED, in association with Citizens Welfare Association of Richard Town and Langford Town organised this programme.

Col. Fredrick D’souza, President of SHRED said that garbage, road and stray dogs are the major problems of this area.

Kathyayini echoed the expectations of the ward. She said that the ward communities should meet at a public place every month. Planning, and more importantly, auditing of the funds was expected from these meetings. "We are lucky that ten women are running for this election. None of them has any criminal record", she added.

This video has been compiled by Gourab Das, a student at the Indian Institute of Journalism and New Media.

All the candidates seemed to be in agreement about the responsibilities and duties expected from them.

The candidates were given a set of questions to answer. Each of them asserted that their endeavours would be manifestations of complete transparency. There will be a book, which will show the funds allocated and spent, they said.

Among the candidates present, C Rathna of National Congress Party, refused to speak saying her husband would speak instead of her. The audience refused to allow this. This candidate did not speak throughout the debate, despite remaining on stage.

Jayanthi G, the JD(S) candidate said that she has been in the party for seven years. "I will consult all the people. I will try to solve the problem of encroachment. I will work towards a corruption-free place," she said.

Leela G, an independent candidate said that she would do whatever is decided in the often-held meeting. "I will give you all the details of the budget".

The residents, on their part, were hopeful that their grievances would soon be heard. "Transparency is what we want. Usually after the election, the big political leaders intervene and matters tend to go out of hand," said Sumitha, a resident of this ward. She said that usually the budget allocated is not huge, thus the priorities should be set. The residents hope that the women who have come forward would be able to maintain the situation. "Usually the man in the household rules. We do not want that to happen over here," said Sumitha.

Seema Khanum, another independent candidate said that civic amenities and education are her main targets.

The candidates were all affirmative that it is the ‘people’ who play an important role and promised to involve them in the decision-making. "We give ideas, we also need a feedback. We need to know what is to be done, and what not to be done. We are not doing business," added Khanum.

References
 

Comments:

  1. Kathyayini Chamaraj says:

    Dear Chandreyee,

    Thanks for covering this event. I would just like to add that all nine women contestants out of ten (one contestant is not campaigning) appeared for the debate, although at different times. But a majority of them sat for almost one hour and listened to the speeches of all other contestants and stayed on for the interaction. Ms Sowmya of the Congress party came after the others left at 6.55 PM and stayed and interacted with citizens till 7.30 PM. Around 85 citizens attended the interaction.

    And just two small corrections. The President of SHRED is Col. Fredrick D’Sa and not D’Souza and the Citizens’ Welfare Association is of Richmond Town and Langford Town and not Richards Town.

    Sincerely,
    Kathyayini Chamaraj

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

Big promises, unheard residents: Bengaluru’s new parking rules need a rethink

The draft rules meant to manage road space demand end up expanding supply, outsourcing enforcement, and pricing residents out of their streets.

On August 11, the Urban Development Department quietly published the draft Greater Bengaluru Authority (Parking) Rules, 2026 — the legal framework  meant to give teeth to Bengaluru's much-discussed Parking Policy 2.0. Citizens have thirty days to send in objections. Yet, few will read all eighteen pages of the notification. Fewer still will notice that a law framed as a way to curb traffic demand is, on close reading, a plan to expand parking supply and hand over enforcement to private players, while leaving the ordinary resident worse off.  That gap between the promise and what’s on paper matters, because parking…

Similar Story

Citizens step up: How South Bengaluru volunteers solved SIR hurdles

From tracking down 2002 voter details to coordinating with overworked BLOs, community members in Bengaluru are stepping in where the system falls short.

While the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process aims to clean up electoral rolls, the enumeration forms created innumerable hurdles for existing voters. From tracking down elusive 2002 voter details to coordinating with overworked Booth Level Officers (BLOs), citizens across Bengaluru faced a daunting task completing the registration process. Recognising these challenges in their own neighbourhoods, volunteers led by three active citizens—Poongothai, Aparna Shamanth, and Venkatachalam Subramaniam—took it upon themselves to help people in their community and beyond.   Mapping the confusion in Gottigere Poongothai lives in Gottigere, which falls under the Bengaluru South assembly constituency. Her community consists of around 400…