As chairman promises to shield community tricycles from NURTW levies, The Press Nigeria demands transparency on procurement costs, council spending, revenue collection and the delivery of public projects.
The promise of 300 tricycles for residents of Mafoluku, Oshodi and Isolo raises an important question about local government accountability: **how much will the project cost, where is the money coming from, who will supply the tricycles, and what safeguards will ensure that the benefits reach ordinary residents?**
The Chairman of Oshodi-Isolo Local Government, Kehinde Almaroof-Oloyede, popularly known as Kendoo, says he has ordered 300 tricycles to provide community transportation and has warned that National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) officials, including those associated with Musiliu Akinsanya, popularly known as MC Oluomo, and Sego, will not be permitted to impose levies on the vehicles.
The declaration, if implemented as described, could open a new debate about transport costs, the powers of transport unions and the responsibility of local government to protect residents from unauthorised collections.
But the chairman’s announcement must also be examined through the lens of public finance.
A fleet of 300 tricycles is not a small undertaking. It involves procurement, maintenance, insurance, operational arrangements, staffing and a sustainable funding model. Residents deserve to know the financial details behind the promise, rather than being left with an announcement whose actual cost and implementation status remain unclear.
The first question is straightforward: how much will each tricycle cost, and what is the total value of the order?
Has the council awarded a contract? If so, to which company? Was the supplier selected through a transparent procurement process? What specifications were agreed upon, what payment terms apply, and when is delivery expected?
The council should publish the contract value, procurement method, supplier details, payment schedule and delivery timetable, subject to legitimate legal and commercial confidentiality requirements.
If the vehicles have already been paid for, residents should be told how much was disbursed and what evidence confirms delivery. If the order is still being processed, the chairman should explain the project’s current stage.
These questions do not establish that public funds have been misappropriated. They are necessary to ensure that a potentially beneficial project is protected from waste, inflated pricing, poor procurement and avoidable implementation failures.
**A public promise must be followed by a public record.**
The tricycle announcement also provides an opportunity to examine the broader financial management of Oshodi-Isolo Local Government.
The Lagos State Government’s published 2024 budget document listed approximately ₦3.21 billion in approved capital expenditure for Oshodi-Isolo Local Government. That figure relates to the council’s approved capital budget and should not be confused with its total annual revenue, actual expenditure or the amount available for the tricycle project.
The critical accountability questions concern what the council actually received, what it spent and what residents received in return.
How much was budgeted and released for roads, drainage, primary healthcare, sanitation, education and community transport? Which projects were completed? Which remain unfinished? Were the contracts delivered within their approved budgets and timelines?
A budget allocation is not proof of expenditure, just as expenditure is not proof of successful delivery.
To establish whether public money has been mishandled, residents need access to audited financial statements, procurement records, payment vouchers, project completion certificates and any relevant audit queries or findings.
If those records reveal irregularities, the council must explain them and take appropriate corrective action. If they demonstrate that funds were properly spent and projects delivered, that evidence should equally be made public.
**The Press Nigeria will not substitute allegations for evidence, but neither should public officials substitute publicity for accountability.**
Kendoo’s declaration that NURTW officials will not be allowed to impose levies on the proposed community tricycles raises a separate question: which charges are legally authorised, who is entitled to collect them, and how will the council enforce its position?
The chairman reportedly argued that if transport union officials cannot collect money from the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, they should not collect it from community tricycles.
The comparison requires clarification. BRT operations and privately or publicly operated community tricycles may be governed by different operating arrangements, licences and applicable charges. The council should therefore identify the legal basis for its position rather than relying solely on a political declaration.
The public also needs clarity on the difference between legitimate government fees, authorised union dues and illegal extortion.
Who will determine the permitted charges? Will riders receive official identification and approved operating conditions? Will collections be cashless, receipted and auditable? Where can residents report demands for unauthorised payments?
These questions are essential because transport operators may ultimately pass unlawful or excessive charges on to passengers.
If the council intends to protect residents and operators, it must establish a transparent system that identifies lawful charges and provides a credible mechanism for enforcement.
Another unanswered question concerns ownership and operations.
Will the tricycles belong to the local government, a private operator or individual beneficiaries? Will drivers be recruited, licensed and paid by the council, or will the vehicles be allocated under a lease-to-own arrangement?
Will the service charge passengers commercial fares? If so, who will determine the rates, and how will the council prevent the scheme from becoming another source of unaccounted revenue?
The project should also provide for maintenance, replacement parts, road safety, insurance, driver training and the protection of passengers.
If the tricycles are intended to support low-income commuters, the council should explain how affordability will be measured and maintained.
A project can begin with good intentions and still fail if the vehicles are poorly maintained, inadequately supervised or allocated without clear criteria.
The chairman should therefore publish an operational framework showing how the tricycles will serve Mafoluku, Oshodi and Isolo, how many will be assigned to each area and what residents should expect once the service begins.
Oshodi-Isolo is a major commercial and residential area of Lagos, with substantial transport needs and a large population of traders, workers, artisans and small-business owners.
Residents require functioning roads, drainage, sanitation, accessible primary healthcare, quality public schools and effective community services. The council’s performance should therefore be assessed across these responsibilities, not through a single project announcement.
A comprehensive three-year financial and performance review would help residents understand the council’s priorities and results.
Such a review should include annual budget performance, audited accounts, internally generated revenue, statutory allocations, procurement awards, completed projects and outstanding contractual obligations.
It should also identify any material audit findings, explain the council’s responses and disclose whether corrective measures were implemented.
Where expenditure cannot be reconciled with delivered projects, the council should provide explanations. Where allegations of financial wrongdoing are supported by evidence, the relevant oversight and law-enforcement authorities should investigate.
This is how accountability should work: establish the facts, identify responsibility and pursue remedies where necessary.
The chairman’s 300-tricycle announcement should not end with a headline. It should begin a process of public scrutiny.
The Press Nigeria asks the Oshodi-Isolo Local Government chairman to clarify:
1. What is the total contract value of the 300 tricycles, and how much will each unit cost?
2. Which company is supplying the vehicles, and what procurement process was followed?
3. Has payment been made, and what documentary evidence confirms the order and eventual delivery?
4. What are the council’s actual revenue and expenditure figures for the relevant financial years, and where can residents access its audited accounts?
5. What projects have been completed against the council’s approved budgets, and what remains outstanding?
6. Who will own and operate the tricycles, and how will fares, maintenance and revenue collection be regulated?
7. What legal authority will the council rely upon to prevent unauthorised transport levies, and how will complaints be investigated?
8. What independent monitoring arrangements will ensure that the vehicles serve the communities for which they were promised?
These questions are not a verdict against the chairman. They are a demand for the information required to make a fair judgment.
Kendoo and the council management should be given the opportunity to provide the relevant documents and respond to concerns about procurement, spending and service delivery.
## THE PRESS NIGERIA’S POSITION: PUBLIC MONEY MUST LEAVE A PUBLIC FOOTPRINT
The promise of 300 tricycles could provide an opportunity to improve local mobility and challenge unauthorised collections from community transport operators. Its success, however, will depend on transparent procurement, clear operating rules and verifiable benefits for residents.
The same standards must apply to every major local government project.
Public resources must be traceable from budget approval to payment, from payment to delivery, and from delivery to measurable benefits for the people.
If the tricycles are delivered at a fair price, properly maintained and operated transparently, the council should receive credit for the results. If the procurement process reveals irregularities, the public deserves an explanation and appropriate action.
What residents cannot afford is a system in which announcements are celebrated while financial details remain inaccessible.
**The real test of Kendoo’s leadership will not be the number of tricycles announced, but the number delivered, the money properly accounted for, the transport charges lawfully enforced and the tangible benefits enjoyed by the people of Oshodi-Isolo.**
Accountability is not an attack on local government. It is the foundation of public trust.
**THE PRESS NIGERIA**
*Accountability. Development. Public Interest.*
