Machakos Governor Wavinya Ndeti has thrown the county’s Sh17.8 billion spending plan back to the County Assembly, rejecting a budget she says was changed by MCAs in ways that could hurt essential services and expose the county to financial and legal problems.
The governor returned the Machakos County Appropriation Bill, 2026, on Monday and asked legislators to reconsider the changes they made before she can approve the law.
Ndeti said the Assembly had altered allocations by Sh853.96 million after the Executive presented its budget. She said the original plan was balanced and based on the 2026 County Fiscal Strategy Paper (CFSP), but the version passed by the Assembly on August 18 contained changes that she considers unlawful.
A major part of the disagreement involves reductions to programmes meant to support residents, particularly young people, women and students.
The Assembly cut the allocation for the Wikwatyo Fund and women and youth empowerment programmes from Sh274 million to Sh74 million. Bursary funding was also reduced by Sh30 million.
Several road projects that are already under contract also had their allocations reduced, raising concern from the governor over the possible effect on ongoing works and the county’s obligations to contractors.
Ndeti said she could not put her name to a budget that she believes breaks the law while taking away funds from services that residents depend on.
“I cannot in good conscience sign into law a legislation that openly violates statutory limits, dismantles essential public services and directly imperils the lives of our people,” she said.
The governor pointed to Regulation 37(1) of the Public Finance Management (County Governments) Regulations, 2015, which provides that a county assembly should not raise or lower a vote ceiling by more than one per cent.
She said the Assembly itself had also increased its development budget by Sh130 million above the ceiling contained in the County Fiscal Strategy Paper.
According to Ndeti, this was contrary to the Public Finance Management Act and formed part of the reasons for sending the Bill back to the lawmakers.
The governor also raised alarm over the reduction of funds for garbage collection.
She said the move could put residents at risk of disease outbreaks, including cholera and typhoid, especially in busy and rapidly expanding urban areas such as Mlolongo, Athi River and Machakos Town.
Ndeti said waste collection was among the services that could not be allowed to suffer from budget cuts because of its direct effect on public health.
She also questioned the decision to reduce funding for the county’s Revenue Management System.
The governor said the system had helped Machakos increase its own-source revenue from Sh1.55 billion in the 2023/24 financial year to Sh3.35 billion in 2025/26.
She warned that cutting its funding could affect the county’s plans to collect Sh4.93 billion in own-source revenue during the 2026/27 financial year.
Ndeti further objected to the reduction of allocations for roads whose contracts are already in place.
She warned that the county could be dragged into expensive legal disputes if it fails to meet its obligations under the contracts, with contractors potentially seeking compensation over breaches of agreement.
The governor was equally critical of the reductions affecting youth programmes, empowerment funds and bursaries.
She described the move as “a direct assault on the youth”, saying it would hit young people who rely on county programmes for opportunities and support.
With the budget dispute now before the Assembly, Ndeti has formally returned the Bill under Section 24(2)(b) of the County Governments Act.
The section requires the Assembly to reconsider the parts of the legislation that have been referred back by the governor.
The MCAs now face a choice between addressing the concerns raised by Ndeti or pushing ahead with the version they approved.
If lawmakers reject the governor’s recommendations and try to pass the Bill without changes, they will need a two-thirds majority to do so.
Ndeti has also warned that MCAs who proceed with the disputed provisions without dealing with her concerns could be held personally responsible for losses or illegal spending arising from the budget.
The disagreement has opened a new front in the relationship between the county Executive and the Assembly, with the final decision on the Sh17.8 billion budget now depending on how the two sides handle the disputed allocations.