BUDGET STANDOFF: Open Letter to Speaker Kinengo Katisya

OPEN NOTE TO HON. KEVIN KINENGO KATISYA, SPEAKER - KITUI COUNTY ASSEMBLY

Dear Sir,

This is Jack Maseso addressing you, with humility but clear conscience. I would urge you to engage the highest level of sobriety as you go through the facts contained herein, without any emotional implosion. 

On April 30, 2026, the county CECM in charge of Finance submitted to the County Assembly, Budget Estimates for FY 2026/2027 and Supplementary Budget II for FY 2025/2026. 

In doing this, the CECM Finance complied with PFM Act, 2012, section 129 that mandates him to act as he did. 

Now, at this stage, you are required - not by the Governor nor by the CECM Finance, but by the law - to commit the Supplementary Budget Estimates to the Budget & Appropriations Committee. 

(PFM Act, Section 131(2): before the County Assembly considers the estimates, the relevant committee shall discuss and review them and make recommendations.)

  

The House committee is required by law to review the Budget Estimates and make recommendations to the Assembly. In making its recommendations to the Assembly, the committee, must take into account the views of the CECM Finance and the public on the proposed recommendations(Section 131(2) of PFM Act, 2012) 

 

While the law here is as clear as daylight, you flouted it. Instead of committing the Budget to the relevant committee, you opted to engage an emotional gear and acted unilaterally by returning the Budget to the Executive.

You have claimed that you won't be a conveyor belt, which is agreeable. However your actions on this matter were extremely ultra vires, you overreached yourself and blatantly acted outside the law. 

Your action, of unilaterally purporting to send back the budget to the Executive, clearly shows your willingness to usurp the powers of the Budget & Appropriations Committee, and indeed the whole Assembly which must have the final say on the Budget.

You have also argued that Budget making is a collaborative process between the two arms of the Country Government. On this you are 💯 percent correct.

However, this collaborative process cannot be conducted outside the law. 

As Speaker, you cannot be the judge, the jury and the executioner. Yet your action of 'returning' the Budget - without involving the relevant committee and the Assembly - casts you as such. Your action, in this particular instance, is not anchored in any law. 

Under Section 131 of the PFM Act, the Speaker doesn't have the unilateral power to “return” the budget to the Executive before the relevant committee processes it. It's a simple matter of Fact and law. Zero ambiguity.

The Speaker’s role is mainly procedural, administrative and to preside over Assembly proceedings. You have no power to send back the Budget simply because you dislike it before the committee's scrutiny.

So at this stage, I have only one objective question? Are you willing to commit the Supplementary Budget to the Budget & Appropriations Committee of the Assembly? 

If you are not willing to do that, under which law are you deriving protection?

A Speaker who bypasses the committee stage in budget making is acting contrary to the PFM Act, contrary to Standing Orders and is openly rogue. 

Should the Executive send the Budget Estimates back to the County Assembly, kindly comply with the law by sending it to the relevant committee for review/ scrutiny. 

 If there are any issues of concern, let them be ironed out - by the two sides - at the committee stage.

Any other action is not provided for in law and is not anticipated. 

Cheers. 

_Jack Maseso_