Coimbatore's 2026-27 Budget Draws Criticism for Lack of Fresh Initiatives
The proposed municipal budget for Coimbatore for the financial year 2026-27 has sparked significant controversy, with opposition councillors expressing strong dissatisfaction over its content. The budget document, presented on Monday, largely reiterates projects that were announced in previous fiscal years, leading to accusations of stagnation and poor planning.
Key Projects Repeated from Past Budgets
The budget highlights several ongoing or previously announced initiatives without introducing substantial new schemes. Notable projects carried forward include:
- The development of pink parks across the city
- The ambitious Noyyal river front development project
- Bio-CNG initiatives aimed at sustainable energy production
- Waste-to-energy plants at Vellalore to manage urban waste
Additionally, the budget lists several infrastructure projects that have remained on paper without tangible progress. These include the multilevel car parking facility at Crosscut Road, the removal of hyacinth from smart city lakes, skywalks at three key locations including Gandhipuram and Ukkadam, and the expansion of Sathyamangalam Road and Marudhamalai Road.
AIADMK Councillors Stage Dramatic Walkout
The budget meeting witnessed dramatic scenes as two AIADMK councillors staged a walkout in protest against what they termed as misplaced priorities and inadequate allocations. The councillors expressed frustration over the corporation's approach to budgeting, particularly in light of recent property tax hikes.
AIADMK councillor R Prabhakaran, representing ward number 47, voiced strong objections during the proceedings. "There is absolutely nothing in this proposed budget that addresses the needs of students, the general public, or the youth of our city," he stated emphatically.
Prabhakaran further criticized the financial planning, noting, "Despite implementing a 100% hike in property tax, the corporation has presented a deficit budget. What's more concerning is the complete absence of new projects. We are simply seeing the same old projects being recycled year after year."
The councillor provided specific examples of this repetition, pointing out that the multilevel complex announced in the 2025-26 budget appears again in the upcoming year's document without any progress. Similarly, initiatives in the school education department, including smart classrooms and industrial visits for students, were listed in the current financial year's budget and have been copied verbatim into the 2026-27 proposal without any modifications or updates.
Additional Concerns from Opposition Councillors
CPI councillor K Shanthi of ward 41 raised additional concerns about infrastructure development. "We sincerely hope that scheme roads will be properly announced in future budgets and actually implemented on the ground," she remarked, highlighting the gap between budgetary announcements and actual execution.
The proposed budget does include several ongoing projects that require continued funding, such as:
- Construction of Animal Birth Control (ABC) centers
- Development of the bio-CNG plant at Vellalore
- Construction of the Ukkadam bus terminal
- Underground drainage works across the city
- Bio-mining phase II for waste management
Municipal Commissioner Defends Budget Approach
Corporation commissioner M Sivaguru Prabakaran offered explanations for the budget's composition during the meeting. "It is standard practice to include ongoing projects in proposed budgets, especially when there have been delays in fund allocation or detailed project report approvals," he clarified.
The commissioner emphasized the administrative necessity of this approach, stating, "If such ongoing projects were excluded from the budget document, there is a genuine risk that they might be completely dropped from the city's development agenda. Furthermore, payments and settlements for these projects will occur in the upcoming financial year, so their inclusion ensures proper accountability and continuity."
Regarding the absence of scheme roads from the budget document, Commissioner Prabakaran attributed this to a clerical error. "This omission was unintentional and will be rectified through appropriate administrative procedures," he assured the council members.
The budget discussion highlights ongoing tensions between the municipal administration and opposition councillors regarding development priorities, budget transparency, and the pace of infrastructure implementation in one of Tamil Nadu's most important industrial cities.
