Are ward committee meetings improving governance in Bengaluru?

Bengaluru's ward committee meetings are almost ineffective now due to low attendance, corporators refusing to share data, and so on. But there's a lot citizens can do to turn this around

A year after ward committee meetings began in Bengaluru, we look at how effective they have been. A recent study by Sensing Local Foundation reveals that many wards have not had these monthly meetings at all.

In the seven months between December 2018 and June 2019, each of the 198 BBMP wards should have held seven ward committee meetings. But 52 wards had no meetings at all, and only 12 percent of the wards conducted at least five meetings.

While the meetings are supposed to discuss new projects, budget allocation etc for the ward, they are functioning more like grievance redressal platforms, the study finds. Reasons for this include the lack of a set agenda for meetings, corporators refusing to share data, and so on.

Corporators weren’t present at all in many meetings, though they are supposed to chair these. The report finds that only about 60 percent of the meetings were chaired by corporators or their proxies.

In this scenario, what can you do to get ward committees to work effectively?

Read more:

[Corrigendum: In the video, it’s mistakenly mentioned that 60 percent of the ward committee meetings were chaired by corporators, and the rest by their proxies. It should be “60 percent of the meetings were chaired by corporators or their proxies, and the rest were often anchored by the ward committee members or secretary”. We regret the error.]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

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…

Similar Story

Bidadi GBIT project: Land acquisition process and compensation raises critical questions

As the goverment focuses on land acquisition for the 7,481-acre project, are farmers' rights and crucial social impact checks being compromised?

The Greater Bengaluru Integrated Township (GBIT) in Bidadi, first notified in March 2025, received its final notification in June 2026 under the Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act (KUDA Act), 1987. The project is branded as India's first and largest AI City, featuring an AI-integrated township. The project will be implemented by the Greater Bengaluru Development Authority (GBDA) under the same act. Three villages, Kempainapalya, Vaderahalli, and Mandalahalli are notified in the Gazette under Section 19(1) of the KUDA Act for the implementation of a development scheme, deemed as public purpose. The development scheme is spread over a total of 7,481…