Wycliffe Oparanya takes over the helm of Governors' Council

JavaScript is disabled!

Please enable JavaScript to read this content.

Kakamega Governor Wycliffe Oparanya. [File, Standard]

Kakamega Governor Wycliffe Oparanya has been voted unanimously as the new Council of Governors Chairman.

Oparanya was contesting against six contestants namely: Anne Waiguru (Kirinyaga County), Anyang' Nyong'o (Kisumu County), Jackson Mandago (Uasin Gishu County), Salim Mvurya (Kwale County) and Josphat Nanok (Turkana).

Turkana Governor Josphat Nanok was seeking re-election after expiry of his one-year term which began in December 2017. Murang'a Governor Mwangi Wa Iria has been voted in as the Vice Chair of CoG.

Oparanya is the fifth governor to be picked to head the council after Isaac Rutto (Bomet), Peter Munya (Meru), Salim Mvurya (Kwale) and Josphat Nanok (Turkana).

Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) Party has congratulated Governor Oparanya who is also the Deputy Party Leader on his election as the chairman of the Council of Governors.

“Hon. Oparanya has shown exemplary performance since his election as Governor of Kakamega County six years ago. His track record speaks for itself and his election today only confirms the confidence his colleagues in the Council of Governors have in him. It is our hope that Hon. Oparanya will use the position to champion for the strengthening of Devolution for a better future of our Nation,” read part of the ODM statement to newsrooms.

ANC party leader Musalia Mudavadi has also congratulated the Kakamega Governor as he takes up leadership of the Council of Governors.

“Governor Oparanya has the requisite experience, commitment and drive to lead the CoG in protecting the gains and promoting the entrenchment of devolution,” Mudavadi said in a press statement.

The vote comes in the wake of a tussle pitting counties against Commission of Revenue Allocation (CRA).

Recently, a number of counties opposed the proposal formulated by the CRA for disbursing devolved funds to the counties.

Certain counties feeling aggrieved argued that the CRA did not consider the way in which counties contribute to revenue collection at the national levels, and failed to factor in poverty levels in various regions.