In Oyo State today, governance is increasingly being measured not by rhetoric, but by visible, verifiable projects that improve everyday life. Across Ibadan and other parts of the state, a quiet but important trend is emerging: local government chairmen are not only executing projects, they are confident enough to invite the governor, Seyi Makinde, to publicly commission them. That confidence is not symbolic, it is earned.
What we are witnessing is a shift from quiet administration to visible governance. Projects are no longer just delivered; they are showcased, validated and used to communicate performance. Commissioning has become more than ceremony, it is a statement that a project can withstand public scrutiny, that due process was followed and that the outcome is worthy of state-level endorsement.
But this emerging culture also exposes a deeper conversation; one that goes beyond visibility into the question of capacity, priorities, and value.
With or without local government autonomy, there is money in the system. Let no one bamboozle you into believing that council chairmen are entirely helpless, surviving only on what governors choose to release. The reality is more nuanced. Allocations from FAAC have increased in recent years, especially following fuel subsidy removal and exchange rate adjustments. By implication, local governments being constitutionally recognized beneficiaries also receive higher inflows.
Yes, the Joint Allocation Account structure gives state governments significant influence.
Yes, concerns about deductions and control are legitimate. But even within that framework, evidence across Oyo State shows that some local governments are still delivering projects that are visible, measurable and impactful. Which raises an uncomfortable but necessary question: if others can build within the same constraints, what exactly is the excuse elsewhere?
A closer look at project records makes this even clearer. Data from the state’s project tracking platform as of December 2025 shows that several councils are not just receiving funds, they are deploying them in ways that are specific and verifiable. In Lagelu Local Government, the dualisation of the 8.3km Akobo–Ojurin–Olorunda Abba Road and the development of an ultra-modern market at General Gas stand out as major interventions with clear economic impact. In Egbeda Local Government, the reconstruction of the 6.45km Olodo–Ajia Road reflects a similar commitment to improving mobility in fast-growing communities.
Hon. Seun Olufade of Ibadan North Local Government has just delivered a 540-stall market and motor park, alongside the reconstruction of internal roads within residential estates, these are projects that combine commerce with urban accessibility. In Oluyole Local Government, the scope is even broader: from the 4.67km Odo-Ona Kekere-Arajapa Road to a Grade A Customary Court at Idi Ayunre, the provision of a staff bus and the construction of classroom blocks powered by solar boreholes. This is not isolated intervention, it is coordinated, multi-sector engagement.
Even beyond these large-scale examples, other councils continue to implement smaller but meaningful projects. In Akinyele Local Government, rural roads and market-linked infrastructure support agrarian communities and local economies. Across multiple LGs, there are ongoing upgrades of primary health centres, renovation of school buildings and rehabilitation of inner roads. These projects may not always dominate headlines, but they are visible, functional and directly impactful.
Taken together, these examples challenge a convenient narrative. They show that, despite structural limitations, performance is possible and more importantly, it is measurable.
This is where the question of Ibarapa becomes unavoidable. In Ibarapa, comprising Ibarapa North, Ibarapa Central and Ibarapa East, the scale and visibility of projects have not matched what is increasingly becoming the norm elsewhere in the state. The issue may not be a complete absence of projects, but a combination of limited execution, weak visibility, or inadequate documentation. But in governance, perception matters. A project that is not clearly seen, properly detailed, or publicly validated risks being treated as though it does not exist.
In 2026, one does not expect a local government to list the construction of a box culvert as a flagship achievement. Basic drainage infrastructure is important, no doubt, but governance has moved beyond that threshold. Communities are dealing with larger challenges: access roads, healthcare delivery, school infrastructure, economic hubs. The bar has been raised.
And even when such projects are executed, a more critical question follows: at what cost? Cost, value and impact are essential parameters in assessing performance. Constructing a box culvert for over 300 million naira or renovating a facility for over 150 million naira may not be inherently outrageous in today’s economy, but they must be justified in terms of scale, quality and the number of people impacted. Without that linkage, such projects risk appearing disproportionate, if not wasteful.
When project records in some areas appear scanty, vague, or lacking in detail, especially when compared to the specificity seen in Ibadan and adjoining councils, it raises legitimate concerns. In governance, opacity invites suspicion. Where others can point to kilometres of roads, structured markets and institutional buildings, it is no longer sufficient to offer explanations without evidence.
This is why commissioning matters. A chairman who has executed verifiable projects will not hesitate to invite the governor to inspect and commission them. Visibility becomes a natural consequence of performance. It reinforces accountability, builds public trust and situates the local government within the broader development narrative of the state.
Ibarapa cannot afford to remain on the margins of this evolving governance culture. The people deserve to see tangible outcomes, roads they can drive on, markets they can trade in, schools their children can learn in and health centres that function. And when such projects exist, they should not be hidden; they should be showcased.
The real issue, therefore, is not whether Ibarapa chairmen should invite the governor. It is whether enough has been done to justify that invitation. Until local governments in the zone begin to deliver projects that are visible, impactful and verifiable, the absence of commissioning ceremonies will continue to reflect a deeper governance gap.
The people of Ibarapa should not only see the governor during funerals, political rallies, or occasional ceremonial appearances. We deserve tangible, visible interventions, roads we can drive on, schools our children can learn in, markets we can trade at, and health centres that actually function. The governor’s presence should be a celebration of development, a ribbon-cutting of projects that improve lives, not only a presence at somber or political events. Local government chairmen across Ibarapa must lead this crusade in the remaining months of their tenure. They must get to work, deliver measurable results and stop being distracted by social media stunts or TikTok videos. Governance is not content creation; it is service, impact and accountability. The time for action is now. The call is simple, and it is urgent: build first, then invite.
0 Comments