DISCUSSION PAPER Public Disclosure Authorized

Report No, UDD-48

MAKING MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT WORK: THE CALCUTTA EXPERIENCE

by

Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority Public Disclosure Authorized

and

Third Urban Project World Bank Mission

March 1984 Public Disclosure Authorized

Water Supply and Urban Development Department Operations Policy Staff The World Bank Public Disclosure Authorized

The views presented herein are those of' the author(s), and they should not be interpreted as reflecting those of the World Bank; This report is an attempt to share the experience of Calcutta's Municipal Development Programme (MDP) with other urban areas. The MDP itself is one component, albeit an important one, in a larger integrated programme of urban improvements, the third Calcutta Urban Development Programme, CUDP III.

The ideas and innovations that lie behind the Calcutta experience have evolved over a long period of time and. involved people too numerous to mention individually. The MDP itself has been set in place by the Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) and the World Bank Mission during the preparation of CUDP III, and. the report has been written by Kalyan Roy of CMDA and Christopher Turner of the Bank Mission. ABSTRACT

Cities in the developing countries are increasingly faced with the pressure of improving existing urban servic.e delivery performance but with inadequate resources to provide and sustain the necessary assets.

This paper describes the response to such problems being adopted in the Calcutta Metropolitan Area of with the hope that this experience will be of benefit to other urban areas. The case of Calcutta is particularly appropriate as for many years it has suiffered from economic decline, minimal investment in infrastructure and civic services, chronic health problems and rapid population growth.

The success that has been achieved to date in Calcutta and which is described in the following pages, owes much to the State Government's commitment to the devolution of major decision making rqsponsibilities to a local level and the emergence of an informal but highly effective metropolitan management team made up of key people in different agencies. This team is effectively co-ordinating and steering the overall development programme. TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ...... 1

2.0 Historical Sketch of Urbanization and Urban Development in India, West and the Calcutta Metropolitan Area ...... 2

2.1 Urbanization in India and ...... 2.2 Urban Development in India and West Bengal...... 2 2.3 The Evolution of the Calcutta Metropolitan Area (CMA) ...... 4 2.4 Early Urban Development Planning Initiatives in the CMA...... S 2.5 Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) and the Urban Development Process--CUDP I and II 6

3.0 Origins of the Municipal Development Programme...... 8 3.1 The Essential Preconditions ...... 8 3.2 Impact Evaluation of CUDP I and II...... 10 4.0 Formulation of the Municipal Development Programme. 114

4.1 Background ...... 14 4.2 Strengthening the Institutional Capacity of Local Government ...... 14 4.3 Strengthening the Financial Capacity of Local Government ...... 15 4.4 Design and Appraisal of the Municipal Development Programme ...... 22 4.5 Designing and Institutionalising the Appraisal Process ...... 24

5.0 Implementation of the MDP ...... 31

5.1 Implementation Functions and Processes ...... 31 5.2 Implementation Progress ...... 33 5.3 Monitoring and Evaluation of MDP ...... 34 6.0 Lessons for Other Cities ...... 41

6.1 Defining the Problems and Response*...... 41 6.2 Generation of Sustainable Investment Programmes.... 42 6.3 Evaluation and Appraisal ...... 43 6.4 Implementation ...... 44 6.5 Monitoring of Programme Performance ...... 44 6.6 Training Initiatives ...... 45 6.7 Some Costs and Potential Risks of the MDP ...... 45

Annexes

1 Summary Appraisal Format for Municipal Programmes...... 47 2 MDP Sectoral Investment Allocation by ...... 56 3 Additional Staff Requirements for MDP Implementation.... 64 4 Guidelines for Preparation of Estimates ...... 65 5 Standard Forms for Submission of istimate ...... 68 6 Bibliography ...... 76 1.0 INTRODUCTION

Many cities in developing countries are faced with the dual problems of meeting acute deficiences in infrastructure and service delivery and at the same time of financing and sustaining the necessary investments. In some instances previous investment programmes have exacerbated the situation by creating assets that are overly sophisticated, fail to meet their service delivery targets, are unrelated to the existing local level deficiencies and are incapable of being sustained. These factors poinrt to the need for a process that allows the views of local representatives to be incorporated in the design of new investment programmes while also linking the allocation of investment funds more closely to the sustainability of the assets created.

Such a process is currently being implemented in the Calcutta Metropolitan Area of West Bengal, India. Termed the Municipal Development Programme (MDP), it represents one institutional, legisla-tive, financial and technical response to the array of problems outlined above. The approach has evolved over a considerable period and from two previous major urban investment programmes, CUDP I and II. The Municipal Development Programme forms part of a comprehensive metropolitan-wide urban improvement programme (CUDP III) and represents roughly 36% of the new CUDP III programme investment. Of equal importance to the MDP process in its application to other cities are the lessons learnt from the impacts of previous urban investments which have had an important bearing on the way in which the MDP has evolved. Both are the subject of this report which is structured accordingly.

Section 2.0 presents a brief sketch of the Indian urban context and early planning and development initiatives in the Calcutta Metropolitan Area. The origins of the Municipal Development Programme are set out in Section 3.0 in terms of the impacts of previous investments and the comprehensive local government policy reforms and initiatives that have been enacted by the West Bengal State Government. Section 4.0 describes how the MDP has been formulated from the strengthening of institutional and financial capacity government, of local the establishment of the size of programme, and sector priorities, to the design and institutionalisation of the appraisal process. The implementation functions and processes are set out in Section 5.0 which also describes the monitoring and evaluation to be undertaken during the implementation and operation of the programme. Section 6.0 draws out the most important lessons arising from the Calcutta experience for the mun!.-ipal development programmes of other cities. 2.0 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF URBANISATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IN WI)DIA, WEST BENGAL AND THE CALCUTTA METROPOLITAN AREA 2.1 Urbanisation in India and West Bengal

India's urban growth has increased over the past 30 years from 2.3% per year in the 1950's to 3.9% per year in the 1970's, and is currently adding more than 7 million people to India's towns and cities annually. Were the present trends to continue, India's total urban population would reach roughly 300 million by the end of the century and 43 cities would have populations in excess of 1 million.

After Kerela, West Bengal is the most densely populated State in India and by 1981 its population had reached 54.5 million of which 13 million (24%) lived in urban settlements including Calcutta, the State capital. The Calcutta Metropolitan Area (CMA), formerly the Calcutta Metropolitan District, is the slowest growing metropolitan area in India. However, it still continues to increase at a rate of more than 200,000 persons annually despite the infrastructure, civic service and employment deficiencies.

2.2 Urban Development in India and West Bengal The Constitution of India provides for a combination of federal and unitary forms of Government. This determines the furnctional domains of the Central Government (GOI) and State Governments, and areas common to both. The Constitution also provides for a mixed economic system. In an attempt to direct the process of rural and urban, private and public sector economic development, a five-year national planning process has been adopted. A National Planning Commission was set up in 1950 at the Central Government level to formulate 5 year plans for the Uinion, and to integrate State and Central Plans.

Urban development planning only became an explicit part of the 5 year planning process with the formulation of the Fourth Plan in 1969-70. The Third Plan partially recognised the need for town and country planning as part of the national housing programme. It provided for the preparation of master plans for a number of urban centres in the Country. The Fourth Plan acknowledged the severity of the urbanisation problem and stressed the need for an increase in the absolute magnitude of expenditure on urban development which had hitherto small. been very

The Fifth Plan represented the first attempt to outline the objectives of, and strategy for the urban development of the Union. The increased priority given to urban development has been continued under the Sixth Plan (1980-81 to 1984-85) - through a much larger outlay and more clearly stated urban development objectives and strategies. This growing recognition of the problems of urban development is reflected in the increasing per-capita Plan outlay given tr the urban sector over recent 5 year plans (Table 1), -3-

TABLE 1: PER CAPITA PLAN OUTLAY IN URBAN SECTOR

Per-capita urban sector outlay (Rs/ur,an Five Year Plan 2opoulation) Third Plan 2.40 Fourth P.Lan 6.90 Fifth Plan 38.80 Sixth Plan 61.70

As in the Union as a whole, the process of urbanisation West in Bengal has been faster than the planning and response. investment Urban development in West Bengal first received significant attention during the Fourth Plan provision in 1969-70, when was made for a substantial urban development in outlay tChe State Plan budget. This emphasis on the was maintained urban sector in the subsequent Fifth and Sixth Plan periods. The State Plan outlay on urban development over the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Plan periods has been Rs. 39.20 Rs. (US$ 4.30); 99.80 (US$ 10.98) and Rs. 196.80 (US$ 21.65) respectively, in terms of per capita urban development population. outlay/urban

In the Fourth and Fifth Plan periods, the bulk of State Plan outlay on urban development was earmarked Metropolitan for the Calcutta Area relative to other urban centres in the State. As Table 2 indicates, this spatial disparitv reduced during was the Sixth Plan period as a result of a shift in State Government Policy to a more balanced spatial growth strategy. urban

TABLE 2: PER CAPITA URBAN DEVELOPMENT OUTLAY IN CMA AND REST OF STATE

Per Capita Outlay- 2 (Rs)_ Area/Plan Period Fourth Plan Fifth Plan Sixth Plan

CMA 49.09 93.40 183.70 Urban areas in rest of State 2.47 11.91 92.84

/1 All prices given in the report are for April 1983, and are consistent with those used at Appraisal /2 Per capita urban development outlay with respect to urban population only 2.3 The 3volution of the Calcutta Metropolitan Area (CMA)

The City of Calcutta was founded in 1690. Because o9 its strategic advantages and harbour facilities the City was developed by the British merchants as their major trading centre in East Asia and became the capital of India. industrial and commercial activities were attracted to and around the City on a large scale and Calcutta remained the capital of India until 1912, when the seat of Government was transferred to Delhi. In the period since Independence Calcutta has remained the political capital of the State of West Bengal and the major economic centre for the whole of eastern India.

The CMA is the largest metropolitan area in India with a 1981 Census population of 10.2 million out of a state-wide urban population of 14.43 million. It stretches over an area of 1,350 sq. km. made up of 2 municipal corporations (Calcutta and ), 37 (out of a total of 110 in the state), 70 non-municipal urban towns (NMU's) and about 450 rural mouzas or vil'lages. The Calcutta and Howrah Municipal Corporation areas account for about 3.3 and 1.2 million of the CMA's total population respectively.

The CMA houses the capital of the State, major administrative and banking functions, the second largest port in India and a large number of industries and trades in both the formal and informal sectors. The area's economy is dominated by manufacturing and service activities and in the manufacturing sector engineering has replaced jute as the dominant industry. In recent years the overall economic performance has been poor and industrial production continues to decline. At the time of Independence and Partition (1947), the CMA was subjected to a major inflow of refugees from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), with which West Bengal shares a common border. Since that time there has been additional immigration into the CMIA from Bangladesh and neighbouring States. Despite the CMA's deficiencies, these influxes together with the availability of economic and social opportunities, physical infrastructure and civic services in Calcutta resulted in an excessive concentration of population and economic activities in the CMA relative to other urban centres in the State. The attendent problems of such highly concentrated urban growth have been manifested for many years now in terms of some of the highest population densities in the world, continuing in-migration, significant inequalities in income distribution, large scale unemployment, serious environmental pollution, chronic health problems, poorly controlled and inefficient land uses, inadequate civic services and an acute shortage of shelter. of particular concern is the staggering growth of the slums (bustees), which currently account for about one-third of the total CMA population or over 3 million 'people. -5-

During the 1950' s the CM? and particularly the metrocore a:,ea of Calcutta and Howrah experienced rapid urban population growth but almost no improvement to civic services or urban infrastructure, resulting in chronic public health problems. Epidemics such as cholera were wideslpread and recurrent, especially amongst the bustee dwellers. Being one of the largest and poorest metropolitan areas in the Third World, Calcutta's problems attracted the attention of international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). At this time local government was cons citutionally, orgarnisationally and financially ill-equipped to respond to these mounting urban problems. By the late 1950's the situation had deteriorated to such a extent that it required major Governmental intervention.

2.4 Early Urban Development Planning Initiatives in the CMA The State Government of West Bengal has played a pic..eering role in the Union's response to the urbanisation problems, having initiated the first concerted urban planning exercise through the creation of the Calcutta Metropolitan Planning Organisation (CMPO) in 1960. Assisted by support from the Ford Foundation, the CMPO prepared a document entitled the "Basic Development Plan (BDP) 1966-86" for the CMA. The main objectives of this document were as follows:

i) to promote faster growth of the Metropolitan economy in a manner consistent with the economic development of the State and Eastern Region of India ii) to create socially acceptable and financially sustainable urban environment

iii) to create the mechanism by which to sustain development planning and effective plan implementation

iv) to strengthen local self-Government and citizen participation in the development of the CMA, and more effective mobilisation of local fiscal resources.

It was a comprehensive and multi-disciplinary exercise which examined the prevailing constraints and problems and recommended an integrated programme of financial, physical, socio-economic and institutional responses. Both short and long-term action plans were identified with the former emphasising schemes which would help arrest the further deterioration of urban conditions in the CMA. The BDP was supported by two master plans, the 'Comprehensive Transportation Plan' and the 'Master Plan for Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage'. The overall exercise assisted the State Government to delineate the Calcutta Metropolitan Planning Area as a single planning region and provided a basis for the enactment of the Calcutta Metropolitan Planning Area (then District), (Use and Development of Land) 1965. Control Act of The initiatives which were to have been taken up during the Fourth Five Year Plan coincided with the deepening economic crisis and industrial recession of the mid 1960's and remained largely unimplemented. During the 1960's the CMA's physical, social and economic conditions deteriorated still further. The shelter problem became more acute and only about 100 million gallons per day of treaced water reached consumers in the cities of Calcutta and Howrah, and this on a sporadic basis. Sanitation was in the main dependent upon service privies and upon the inadequate and irregular collection of refuse. Large areas of land which had become high density unplanned settlements for the urban poor were subject to extensive waterlogging in the monsoon due to the poor drainage sys temr.

2.5 Calcutta Metropolitan Develop:;.ent Authority (CMDA) and the Urban Development Process - CUDP I and I: The failure to implement the CMPO's plans through the inadequacies of the financial and organisational capacity of local government deepened the CMA's urban crisis. By the late 1960's the situation required a massive public investment programme in urban infrastructure and municipal services. In an attempt to respond to the crisis, the State Government in 1970 created the Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) through the enactment of legislation. CMDA was.given a fund of Rs. 150 crores (US$ 157.5 million) by the Government of West Bengal for the implementation of a number of urban development projects in the CXA.

Based on the previous planning exercises of the CMP0, the CMDA selected about 100 schemes in different urban sectors for implementation on a minimum needs basis. These included water supply, sewerage and drainage, solid waste management, conversion of service privies into sanitary latrines, bustee improvement, traffic and transportation, new townships, area development and shelter. The institutional response to inadequately defined responsibilities and lack of planning and implementing capacity within the CMA was for the CMDA to assume overall responsibility for the programme involving other agencies as sub-contractors.

In 1973 the International Development Association (IDA), the soft loan affiliate of the World Bank, expressed its interest in participating in CMDA's development programme and as such agreed to finance 44 out of the 100 on-going urban infrastructure projects. Under this loan, known as CUDP I, IDA provided US$ 35 million equivalent of assistance over 5 years. During the implementation of IDA I, CMDA continued to expand its implementation responsibilities through the creation of sector specific operational directorates. By the mid 1970's it was realised by CMDA, the State Government and IDA that the shortfall in urban infrastructure and basic municipal service provision was so great that the process of urban development and investment would need to continue over a time period well beyond that of the then existing programme. -7-

Moreover, there was a growing realisation that many of the expectations of the Basic Development Plan were unlikely to be realised. Actual project costs were also found to greatly exceed the CMPO estimates thereby reducing the impact of the overall development programme. In order to reconsider the development strategy for the CMA, a Planning Directorate was created within CMDA. After reviewing the Basic Development Plan against the rapidly changing urban situation, the Planning Directorate produced the 'Development Perspective Plan' (DPP) in 1976.

This document proposed the creation of a multi-centre investment strategy for the CMA and provided the revised basis for the subsequent urban development programme - CUDP I:. The document also identified a list of probable projects in different sectors for implementation under CUDP II consistent with the revised development strategy, largely on the basis of achieving the minimum required delivery of urban services. The DPP recognised the overriding requirement to complement physical infrastructure improvements with socio-economic ii"Atiatives such as small scale employment creation, preventative health, primary education and training programmes. Such programmes were included in CUDP II (1978-79 to 1982-83) which was finalised at Rs. 278 crores (US$ 292 million) of which IDA contributed US$ 87 million. The institutional arrangements for the implementation of CUDP II remained as for CUDP I, with CMDA the major executing agency supported by other agencies and State Government departments. Although the (then) 36 urban local bodies within the CMA had neither the elected representation nor the institutional and financial capacity to play a major role in the development process, CUDP II introduced the first step in the devolution of investment decisions through the Municipal and Anchal programme. This programme was targetted at basic water supply, drainage and sanitation and local road investment in the outlying areas of the CMA. It was administered by the CMDA although there was a dialogue with the local bodies, and proved so successful that the original programme allocation of Rs 5 crores was increased to Rs 9 crores under CUDP II. 3.0 ORIGINS OF THE MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME 3.1 The Essential Preconditions During the implementation of CUDIP I and II a series of initiatives were triggered at various levels of State and Metropolitan Government in response to the magnitude of the problems encountered in achieving the programme's objectives. These initiative form the basis for the design, organisation and implementation of the subsequent CUDP III programme of which the MDP is part. Among the more important preconditions for MDP are the legislative, institutional and financial initiatives taken over the past several years at the State and Metropolitan level, the State Government's commitment to the devolution of significant decision making responsibilites and the emergence of an informal but highly effective metropolitan management team, made up of key people in different agencies. This section focusses pa-rticularly on the legislative, institutional and financial reforms that have been carried out and also on the implications of an ex post evaluation of previous investments. In both instances the considerations relate to the design, organisation and implementation of the CUDP III programme. 3.1.1 Specific Initiatives and Reforms (i) the provisions of the Bengal Municipal Act of 1932 were significantly amended in 1980 in order to strengthen the constitutional and financial base of the CMA municipalities. In particular provision was made for municipal elections and fiscal autonomy of the municipalities was strengthened (ii) the Calcutta Municipal Corporation (CMC) Act of 1951 was rescinded and a new Act introduced in 1980 to provide for a greater devolution of powers to the Corporation. For the first time in India, the 1980 Act provides for a cabinet system of Government for civic administration, whereby a Mayor-in-Council, elected for a five year term would become responsible for the day to day management of Calcutta's civic affairs. The new Act was introduced in January 1984 (iii) new and separate legislation has also been enacted for Howrah, the second City of the CMA in the form of Howrah Municipal Corporation (IMC) Act of 1980. This has similar objectives to the Calcutta Municipal Act (iv) a Municipal Finance Commission (MFC) for West Bengal was set up in December 1979 to enquire into different aspects of municipal finance such as revenue and expenditure performance; development needs and finance; relationship of municipalities with the development authorities; property valuation methods and tax structure -9-

(v) in submitting its report in March 1982, the MFC concluded that the existing bodies revenue base of the local was not adequate to cover recurrent This led to the recommendation expenditure. that this resource gap, which currently falls on the grauually State Government, should be reduced through improved internal generation and enlarged revenue tax sharing. With respect development finance the to for Commission emphasised the the local bodies to more need the effectively participate in development process and to prepare budgets as a part annual capital of their own five year plan (vi) a major cause of the financial weakness of bodies has been the the local under-valuation of lands and properties. To overcome this Valuation deficiency, the Central Board (CVB) was set up of the West in 1979 under the terms Bengal Central Vaulation Board The Board is assisting Act of 1978. the municipalities in and retention of assessors, selection property issuance of guidelines for valuation, evaluation of methods valuation and collection of property The of current and arrears demands. Board has also started work and holds on a valuation manual regular meetings with the monitor their local bodies to tax collection efforts. Revised lists have been prepared for valuation estimated most local bodies and it is that property re-valuations coupled changes in property tax structure with overall are likely to increase municipal tax revenues significantly (vii) in July 1980 the State Government set up the Urban Development Strategy West Bengal terms Committee. The Committee's of reference included the formulation State-wide urban of a development strategy to bring decentralisation of urban about the co-ordinate development activities; to the activities of different Government departments agencies and involved in urban development to recommend criteria by which and between to allocate resources different urban centres in among the Committee's the State. Principal recommendations were following: an increased the centres investment allocation for urban outside the CMA; and an increase CMA investment allocated in the share of metrocore to the local bodies outside area of Calcutta and Howrah the (viii) in May 1981 elections were held in the local outside the Calcutta Corporation bodies for 18 years area for the first time and a council of elected representatives now govern each of the municipalities (ix) under the provisions of the Bengal Municipal (Amendment) Act of 1980, the State Government each is required to provide municipal body with one executive, health officer and finance and an engineer. Placement of officers has already commenced. such 32 XImpact Evaluation of CUDP I and II In late 1979 it was decided by the Government of West Bengal and IDA to undertake an impact evaluation of CMDA's CUDP I and II projects and programmes. By then, CIMDA had already established a Progress Monitoring Unit, later designated as the Programme Management Unit (PMU), and a coordination cell to improve the management, coordination and physical and financial progress monitoring of the CUDP II programme. To evaluate the overall impacts of the programme, an appraisal, monitoring and evaluation cell, later designated as the AMEU, was set up in CMDA in 1979. The first task of the cell was to prepare an evaluative study of the major impacts of CMDA's multi-sectoral investment programme. The objective being to use the findings of the impact evaluations in the design and implementation of subsequent urban investment programmes. The impact evaluations identified some positive improvements in service delivery performance, together with a strengthening of institutional capacity and increased employment and income generation in the local economy - all as a result of CIJDP I and II investments. Examples of the major service delivery improvements achieved are as follows: More than 2 million people living in slum areas (over 65% of the total) benefitted from the bustee (slum) improvement programme. Treated water supplies were increased from 100 million gallons per day, to 200 million gallons in parts of the cities of Calcutta and Howrah. Over 5,000 metres of new branch sewers were laid in Calcutta City and 1,000 metres in Howrah, which previously had no sewers. Over 35,000 sanitary latrines were installed, waterlogging was reduced with the completion of some 80,000 metres of new drainage and improvements to existing outfalls. Solid waste collection and disposal was either improved or instituted and 50 kilometres of new roads completed. Under a primary school programme, 50 new schools were built and 200 existing schools renovated and a highly successful preventative community health scheme was launched. A number of potentially serious problems were also identified however. These related to the programme as a whole and also to specif ic sectors. 3.2.1 'General Problems (i.e. common to all sector investments) (i) the implications of the total recurrent expenditures (including operations and maintenance costs) on the CMA's revenue base had not been sufficiently assessed in the design of the CUDP I and In programmes. The total recurrent expenditure shortfall amounted to roughly Rs. 34 croees (51% of total revenue expenditure) in 1982-83 and was projected to increase to Rs. 39 crores (47% of total revenue expenditure) by 1985-86 for all CMA local bodies. This is exclusive of any CUDP III liabilities. In simple terms, under the-prevailing financial regime the assets could not have been sustained (ii) for major infrastructure investments such as water supply and sewerage and drainage, emphasis had been placed on trunk or primary infrastructure to the almost total exclusion of the secondary distribution system with the result that minimal improvements in service delivery were being achieved in practice

(iii) both invest->-fit cost per-capita and delivery of service to the tar(U. population was found to vary significantly across the CMA. Investment was overly concentrated in the Calcutta and Howrah (metrocore) area rather than in the rest of the CMA although the latter area had experienced a more rapid rate of population growth over the 1970's. Of a total CTUDP investment of Rs. 355 crores (US$ 372.75 million), 67% was invested in the Calcutta and Howrah metrocore area (iv) average CMA per-capita income falls with distance from the metrocore. One estimate indicates that per-capita income for Calcutta is 1.7 times the overall average for the CMA. This suggests that the relatively high proportion of investment made in the CMA was discriminating against the urban poor. While 63% of the population outside Calcutta and Howrah belong to the economically weaker section, the figure is 50% for both cities and 45% for Calcutta alone

(v) the institutional capacity of the local bodies* was unequal to the task of satisfactorily sustaining the assets created by the CUDP I and II investments. Moreover there was a growing view that CMDA had become too autonomous and powerful to the detriment of other agencies amd institutions which remained underutilised, including the municipalities. It was also increasingly felt that CMDA was giving too much attention to the implementation of projects and not enough to its economic and financial responsibilities

* The local bodies are defined as the two municipal corporations of Calcutta and Howrah and the 37 municipalities. -12-

(vi) the choice of technology was found to he inappropriate and overly sophisticated in several sectors. Either the proposed technology was not affordable by the target population or physical.constraints mitigated against its adoption. For example, a high cost underground sewerage project was designed and built for the City of Howrah although the majority of its population belong to the urban-poor and despit.e the inadequacies of the City's local road network. As a result a secondary distribution network could not be provided in certain areas and only at a great social cost in terms of the disruption of everyday life in others. Moreover, the majority of households could not afford the house connections to the trunk system

(vii) the length of time required by the legal process to acquire land imposed severe constraints on the implementation of specific programmes and particularly shelter.

3.2.2 Sector Specific Problems

(i) water supply: serious inequalities were found in the per-capita delivery of water between municipalities and between different parts of the City of Calcutta, together with major constraints on the delivery of water to consumers such as the lack of house connections

(ii) bustee improvement: in all about 2 million or 65% of the bustee (slum) dwellers have been covered by improvements in municipal services and environmental hygiene under CUTP I and UI. Despite this significant achievement two major concerns are (a) the appropriation of rental increases in improved bustees by a class of middlemen known as 'hutowners' and (b) the possible eviction of poor tenants unable to afford increasing rents in the improved bustees (iii) sewerage and drainage: despite achieving some reduction in the intensity and duration of waterlogging and conversion of service privies into sanitary latrines in individual premises, serious problems were identified in this sector. Underground sewerage and drainage technology was both overly sophisticated and generally not integrated with ancillary investments. As a result many schemes were either not completed or not properly integrated with existing sewerage and drainage infrastruc ture -13-

(iv) traffic and transport: despite major investments arterial on roads improvements and traffic operation and management within the metrocore, measurable benefits were very limited. The situation was made worse widespread by the encroachment of pavements aPd roads by hawkers and the failure to fully implement solid the CUDP II waste management programme. This in turn led to problems of blocked roads, pavements, sewers thereby and drains reducing the potential benefits of the traffic and transport investments and policies still further. 3;2.3 Recommendations of Evaluative Studies

A number of recommendations were made by the the shortcomings AMEU to ovecome of the CUDP I and II programmes in the design of subsequent urban improvement programmes. Major among were the following: these

(i) as a prerequisite to any h,>rzher investments the in the CMA, financial sustainab,i1ity of the assets created must be clearly established. This required an the assessment of institutiorns., organisational and financial resource base of local government

(ii) emphasis in future programmes should be given completing to the secondary distribution systems of major infrastructure projects so as to ensure the achievement of service delivery benefits from previous investments in trunk infrastructure (iii) a higher proportion of future investments to be allocated to areas outside the metrocore both to reduce the spatial imbalance in past investments and regressive the impact of those investments on the urban poor (iv) low-cost technology and lower design standards to be adopted on all major infrastructure projects (v) steps to be taken to expedite the process of land acquisition which had seriously delayed the implementation of CUDP I and II programmes, and land acquisition requirements of subsequent programmes minimised. to be

3.2.4 A Revised Perspective Plan

It was further concluded that in view of socio-economic the rapidly changing circumstances the 1976 Development Perspective Plan required revision. In November 1981 new the CMDA drafted a Perspective Plan. This recommended that the urban outside the centres metrocore should be the focus of future CMA growth and investment. It also supported the recommendations evaluation of the studies through its emphasis on reduced design standards and a basic needs approach to services. the delivery of urban -14-

4.0 FORMULATION OF THE MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME 4.1 Background

The findings of the evaluation together studies of previous with the local government investments have been substantially reforms and initiatives Calcutta reflected in the approach urban development programme to the third adopted a - CUDP III. metropolitan-wide and CUDP III has and implementation local* approach to planning India. and represents the first such approach in Metropolitan planning and programme implementation responsibility of the remains the agencies CMDA, increasingly such as the Calcutta supported by other and other and Howrah Imtprov,ement State Government departments. Trusts programme implementation Local planning has been effectively and elected representatives devolved to the supported of the individual local by the technical resources bodies, Government. of the CMDA and State The local bodies have been made responsible capital budgets, selection for preparation detailed of sector priorities of planning of investment and appraisal, and continued schemes, their implementation operation and maintenance. 4.2 Strengthening the Institutional Government Capacity of Local

In order to formulate, execute Development Programme, and mionitor the Municipal arrangements the following institutional have been made within Government to CMDA a.nd the State support the local bodies: 4.2.1 Within CMDA (i) the Programme Management Unit (PMU) has responsible for monitoring been made and financial and reporting on the implementation of physical programme the schemes under this (ii) the Appraisal, Monitoring and has been strengthened Evaluation Unit (AMEU), and made responsible appraisal of the MDP, for the programme for monitoring and evaluating and institutional performance. evaluation will concentrate Programme overall goals on the achievement of of the programme and the indicators of socio-economic, specifically on key performance fiscal and institutional

* that is ward level within Calcutta the Corporation areas and Howrah and municipal of CMAc in the rest of the -15-

(iii) a new MDP Directorate has been created within CMDA with technical and accounts staff to guide and assist the local bodies in drawing up detailed plans and estimates once their overall sector investments have been appraised by the AMEU. The Directorate will also assist PMU in monitoring the physical and financial implementation of the programme.

These arrangements are illustrated in Figure 1 which sets out the revised organisational structure of the CMDA.

4.2.2 Within Government of West Bengal

(i) the Dire,7torate of Local Bodies (DLB) under the Local Government and Urban Development Department (LGUDD) has been strengthened to provide the additional staff requirements of the local bodies required to implement the MDP. The DLB is also responsible for the placement of additional officers committed to the municipalities by the State Government and for monitoring and reporting on annual municipal revenue and expenditure performance against preset annual targets (ii) in order to strengthen the existing institutional capacity of local government through seminars and training programmes on the MDP, the State Governmient set up the Institute of Local Government and Urban Studies (ILGUS) under the LGUDD in 1982. The Institute has already organised a number of highly successful training programmes, workshops and seminars for both the elected municipal representatives and their staff. 4.3 Strengthening the Financial Capacity of Local Government 4.3.1 Objectives

The lessons of previous urban development programmes in the CMA clearly demonstrates the futility of making further investments if the assets cannot be properly operated and maintained. The MDP transfers the responsibility for operating and maintaining all assets created/improved under that programme to the local bodies. However, the Municipal Finance Commission (MFC) findings had previously shown that the municipalities face substantial resource gaps in their revenue budgets. These shortfalls have previously been made up by ad hoc subventions from the State. The MFC concluded that the local bodies' dependence on ad hoc State subventions should be gradually reduced and their internal current account fiscal performance progressively improved through: (i) improved internal revenue mobilisation,

(ii) implementation of an incentive based system for the devolution of grants and shared taxes from the Government of West Bengal. FIGURE 1: ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF CMDA

[ . CMDA Bxusd J

,u------input norn Oitsus

Diroclu GG Gone3 1sof Opoto3ions OGc* S.Ufccas & ADOOncIo Soci foiy NoUCICCGoCKwoI OGO (fi~ntrv& ov~zcrsonI)- -- Chiot PnyrlcJ flonnu - DU)OCIGCGo' ual of Enonco

1.Moorvr

inIfon-anfngce!co o\d loaoofnco .~~~______- IC MD A Thoo bam zrLhX+L>D>;u, ACcCsj)fin:l AdrmnInsIsaIoAb & Coovdinolio n C3 p 12 A ItsIUJ'i Is Smmpo n;nQVlIC

5 c * , Sou3rce: . UDA . * 0 ,CUDP ,. i Iii

E( The MFC also recommended that given the level of capital investment to the local bodies should be linked to this in their internal improvement fiscal performance, the objective being to control and reduce the deficits of the local current bodies on their accounts by making annual current account performance the basis for each subsequent year's allocation. MDP capital account

4.3.2 The Revised Grant Structure (RGS) On April 1st 1983 the State Government implemented Grant a Revised Structure (RGS) designed to achieve the objectives described above in 4.3.1 and to coincide of with the commencement CUDP III and the State Government's fiscal year. basically sets The RGS out annual current account performance targets which are individually set for each achievement local body. The of the performance targets then triggers subsequent year's the MDP capital account allocation, with over- and under-achievement of the performance rewarded targets being in the manner set out in section 4.3.3. Table 3 summarises the key relationship between internal revenue targetted growth and the additional recurrent liability attributable to the MDP for each year of and across the programme period all local bodies. Over the five year programme period, total internal revenue generation is projected to increase by Rs 2040.26 lakhs against liability a growth in the recurrent attributable to the MDP of Rs 792.95 equal significance lakhs. Of is the fact that property tax revenue proportion of internal as a revenue generation is projected to increase from 49% in year 1 (1983-84) 1987-88. to over 56% by year 5

TABLE 3: PROJECTED INTERNAL REVENUE AND CUDP III/MDP RECURRENT EXPENDITURE GROWTH 1983-84 TO 1987-88 (Rs lakhs)

CUDP III/MDP Total internal Property tax Year recurrent revenue revenue expenditure 1983-84 5183.68 2582.30 24.60 1984-85 5512.12 2780.73 1985-86 129.57 6072.54 3205t13 333.66 1986-87 6643.85 3632.23 1987-88 583.32 7223.97 4062.83 792.95 Over the MDP period there need for will however still the transfer of resources be a continuing the State Government to the local bodies in the form of from total recurrent expenditure grants and shared taxes will not from existing.and as be entirely met by new investments extent of the internal revenue sources. targetted current account The of each local body for shortfalls/surpluses is illustrated the first year of the in column 11 of MDP under the RGS presenting the Table 4, with the Table complete financial picture itself of each local body. These summary current revenue account targets are and expenditure performance in turn made up of for each local body. targets set individually Revenue Performance

On the revenue side, related performance targets to property tax have been primarily value, assessment administration and include and minimum collection rateable and arrears demands. targets for current base These targets relate and collection efficiency to the existing an improvement of each local tax over time specific body and assume to each local body. Statutory receipts also from the share of been projected and Entry Tax (Octroi) have for each are included as a source individual local body of revenue important revenue (Table 4, column 3). performance target The most to the collection has been set with significant efficiency of property respect source of municipal tax, by far the most Targets have revenue (Table been set at 75% and 4, column 2). tax demands respectively, 50% for current and over to be achieved arrears varying lengths of by the local bodies efficiency time depending on the from which they start. levels of Expenditure Performance On the expenditure side, operational additional MDP and existing and maintenance expenditure recurrent each local body (Table has been projected operation 4, columns 8 and 9). for and maintenance expenditure, For recurrent adopted as annual targets MFC norms have been annual increase (i.e. a maximum of 5% for 'wages and compound recurrent expenses') salaries' and 10% for for each local body. 'other Annual Current Account Performance Targets Each local body has three been provided by the current account performance State Government with first year targets for of the CUDP IIt programme 1983-84, the structure, based on and of the Revised targets the projections set Grant are: out in Table 4. These TABLE_4: FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE PROJECTION BY INDIVIDUAIL LOCAL BOD)Y (1983-84) Rs Lakhs

___ v i. i1 ___I: x P1 I: [I I 1 i 11 LtIe Rvtofj1I TOE_ claT___;iiT-?tT*cno~ - E:x i !t i nc Sho I L (d1 II Or ie r ~;ha re of inLOVcual COM111ilttM~. Cdui ol)~' 1 Ira nje'*a to) COD. - I 1 1 L:xj..rd i t or e O"i(ropu.ltIy I nternia 1 Fn t r y 1Ilvoanuo Tota I I or xaill cCI ICII I 17 'Px Rvne & ,I Deb t 'Pot.,) CI DUP Coi'II'I rinen t "x Tx 234I tJ4/ o ics2 pond i tu re Stirpius I+ I I;x-oid r~co- i¶)(05

(1 2) () ( (5 (6) (7) (8) 1.- () I(10)1) Calcutta Mun. Corp 1,834.00 858 .85 9 15.08 3 ,60 7.93 2. llowrah - 3.30 3. 30 4,822.00 4,825.30 214.16 129.51 88.20 431.87 - 1, 217 .37 3. South -1.75 1.75 775.04 776.79 Suburban 52.05 26.39 33.08 111.52 -334.92 4. 1.65 1.65 114.06 1.15.71 28.22 8.43 30.32 66.97 - 4.19 5. -1.01 1.01 89.10 90.11 20.47 5.11 19.95 45.53 -23.14 6. - 1.03 1.03 47.90 28.732 5.67 29.27 4a.93 - 3.40 63.67 -1.06 1.06 7. South 27.56 5.05 77.82 78.88 -15.21 26.09 58.70 1.02 1.02 8. 19.96 6.44 65.88 66.90 - 8.20 25.58 51.98 - 0.95 0.95 9. 23.23 3.23 58.30 59.25 - 7.25 26.77 53.23 - 0.88 0.88 10. 24.47 4.91 80.66 8l.54 -28.31 13.67 43.05 - 0.79 0.79 11. Bally 29.44 4.90 77.24 78.03 -34.98 21.15 55.49 - 0.64 0.64 12. - 94.98 95.62 -40.13 - - - - 13. Ilooyhly-Chinsura 0.63 0.63 - 0.63 17.41 4.92 8.83 31.16 - 0.63 14. Seramnpore - 0.60 0.60 51.64 20.52 196.23 20.74 55.49 52.24 -21L08 15. - 0.65 0.65 64.81 12.75 13.81 6.89 33.45 65.46 - 9.97 16. - 0.53 0.53 66,79 17.46 3.02 9.92 67.32 -33.87 17. 30.40 - 0-49 0.49 40.86 8.44 4.90 13.23 26.57 41.35 -10.95 18. Chandernagar - 0.48 0.48 33.66 19.50 3 .74 13.00 36.24 34.14 - 7.57 19. North - 0.47 0.47 105.97 106.44 BarrackporeŽ 8.80 0.91 6.41 16.12 -70.20 20. North Dum - 0.45 0.45 30.19 Duom 14.59 7.38 11.04 33 .01 30.64 -14.52 21. - 0.45 0.45 34.11 34.56 13.60 1.51 7.17 22.28 - 1.55 22. Bialisahar - 0.45 0.45 36.71 6.20 6.21 8.25 20.66 37.16 -14.88 23. Kancharapara - 0.41 0141 40.01 40.42 4.69 1.47 6.62 12.78 -19.76 24. - 0. 44 0 .44 26.10 -Kotrungj 14 .98 4.81 11.68 26.54 -13.76 f 25. 31.47 - 0.43 0.43 34.20 Bansberxa 13.06 4.74 10.67 34.63 - 3.16 26. 28.47 - 0.26 0.26 31.57 Chainpcdan i 14.19 2. 44 4.91 31.83 - 3.36 27. 21.54 - 0.37 0.37 7.39 2.11 9.35 32.33 32.70 -11.16 28. 18.85 - 0.29 0.29 28.60 17.49 1.49 4.23 28.89 -10.04 29. 23.21 - 0.30 0.30 59.96 4 .83 1.57 1.83 60.26 -37.05 30. 8.23 - 0.29. 0.29 21.06 3.79 2.18 3.57 21.35 -13.12 9.54 - 0.28 0.28 31. Bhadreswar 7.39 1.37 10.31 10.59 - 1.05 7.87 16.63 - 0.28 0.28 32, 2. 60 5.35 31.69 31.97 -15 .34 4.41 1.2.36 - 0.26 0.26 33. Rajpur 3.22 1.22 13.83 14.09 - 1.73 2.88 7.32 - 0.20 0.20 3 4. Burm Burn 14.04 3-37 15.64 15 .84- - 8.52 5.42 22.83 - 0.25 0.25 35. 8.90 5.46 31.38 31.63 - 8.80 5 .94 20.30 - 0.26 0.26 36. Khardah 6.45 3.02 27.01 27.27 - 6.97 4.41 13.88 - 0.27 0.27 37. 2.34 0.47 30.74 31.01 -17.13 1.72 4 .53 - 0.26 0.26 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 14.77 9.75 10.01 - 5.48 5.59 4.78 25.14 - 0.28 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 0.61 0.28 36.81 37.09 -11.95 1.55 9.12 11.28 - 1.19 1.19 25.50 25.69 -14.41

TT ,2,582.30 1,167.33 1,434.05 5,103.68 2 4 .60 224 .60 7,274.21 7,298.81 -2, 1)5 .13

/ I- o mI1cos~t h;ais btucn assurrid inr i.L Frfr!t yeasc

:2- i,I . i-I .iy71111th,i!.; niot ... taken i ntI 0(ccointf ia tl)Qlh to woo Id be A 5 71-alr runt .11ol1 oill. Virra oi i:'Nent I leetonly. (i) minimum collection of consolidated rate (ii) minimum revenue collection from other internal sources (iii) maximum revenue commitment and are set out in Table 5 for each local body.and cross referenced with Table 4. the columns

4.3.3 The Annual 'Trigger Mechanism' The Mechanism The revised grant structure provides the basis for 'trigger mechanism' by which the annual investment each subsequent year's MDP provision is allocated to individual Under this scheme the local bodies. local bodies fall into three categories: (i) those with revenue deficits targets equal to the current account (ii) those with revenue deficits greater account targets than the current (iii) those achieving revenue surpluses greater deficits less than or than the current account targets. While each local body receives investment its full year one CUDP III allocation, from the second year and for each subsequent of implementation year there will be a between the annual capital direct link account allocation and the account performance of the preceding current local bodies year. That is, those having annual deficits equal revised current account to the annually projected targets will receive the originally capital investment. Local annually revised bodies exceeding the current account deficit targets reduced allocation of capital receive a fiscal investment for the following year. Local bodies creating internal greater than or revenue supluses deficits less than the preset annual account targets will as an incentive current capital funding be given additional in the subsequent year. However additional capital works any process. will be subject to the MDP appraisal 4e3.4 Administration

The RGS is administered by the (DLB) Directorate of Local Bodies of LGUDD and CMDA. DLB is necessary responsible for obtaining the information to monitor and evaluate of each local body the performance against the targets set at (Tables 4 and 5) and appraisal for annually updating the targets. reports and advice on current DLB's the account fiscal performance local bodies together with the of financial oroqress sector physical and reports provide the basis independent AMEU makes on which the its recommendations to State Government and CMDA on the subsequent year's allocation capital investment as described in section 5.2. -20a-

4.35 Figure 2 illustrates how the mechanism would work in a hypothetical

municipality. The columns represent the amount of funding the municipality

would have availa:le, under different performance assumptions. In case A.

municipal property tax revenues are below the target., The municipality

would receive a larger-than-scheduled deficit grant (to assure a minimum

level of service delivery) but would receive no capital funds in the

following year. In case B, municipal property tax revenues equal the

target. The municipality receives its scheduled deficit grant and

capital funding in the subsequent year. In case C, municipal property

taxes exceed the target. Its deficit grant is less than the scheduled

amount, but its scheduled capital fund in the following year is

supplemented by a bonus capital grant.

FIGURE 2

LL'USTRATION OF GRANT SYSTED

Bonus Cipita1 |Grantl

capital Grant Capital Grant, Loan Loan

Current Expe4-- - . Recuirement

Def4iclt Deficit Deficit Gran.t Grant j Grant

Prc,ert .I Ii Zarret, jj Pro?;,s 7a" Prcpe-tt tax

?rcDerty Tax i '

Octrzi Octro , COctrli

Perfc=ance A. Ee.- B. Eqca: tc C. LxceeAs :a-r:et :arFet Tarcet -21-

TABLE 5: FISCAL PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR 1983-84 BY INDIVIDUAL LOCAL BODY (Rs lakhs)

Minimum Minimum Collection of collection of Maximum Corporation/ conslidated revenue Municipality/ from existing rate (current other internal. expenditure No. Notified Area and arrears) sources commitment (col.2 Table 4) (col.3 Table 4) (col.9 Table 4)

1. Calcutta Mun. Corp. 1966.00 1094.00 2. Howrah Mun. Corp 5664.00 214.16 129.51 775.04 3. South Suburban 52.05 4. Bhatpara 26.39 114.06 28.22 8 . 5. Jadavpur 43 89e10 20.47 5.11 6. Kamarhati 47.90 28.73 5.67 77.82 7. 27.56 8. Panihati 5.05 . 65.88 19.96 6.44 58.30 9. Garden Reach 23.23 10. Baranagar 3.23 80.66 24.47 4.91 11. Bally 77.24 /1 29.44 4.90 12. Uluberia-a 94.98 ------13. Hooghly-Chinsurah 17.41 14. 4.92 51.64 20.52 14.23 15. Naihati 64.81 12.75 13.81 16. Barrackpore 66.79 17.46 3.02 17. Titagarh 40.86 8.44 4.90 18. Chandernagar 33.66 19.50 3.74 19. North Barrackpore 105.97 8.80 0.91 20. North Dum 30.19 Dum 14.59 7.38 21. Rishra 34.11 13.60 1.51 22. 36.71 6.20 6.21 23. Kancharapara 40.01 4.69 1.47 24. Uttarpara-Kotrung 26.10 14.98 4.81 25. 34.20 13.06 4.74 31.57 26. 14.19 27. Baidyabati 2.44 32.33 7.39 2.11 28.60 28. Budge Budge 17.49 29. Garulia 1.49 59.96 4.83 1.57 30. Barasat 21.06 3.79 2.18 31. Bhadreswar 10.31 7.39 1.37 31.69 32. New Barrackpore 2.60 33. Rajpur 5.35 13.83 3.22 1.22 34. Dum Dum 15.64 14.04 3.37 31.38 35. Konnagar 8.90 36. Khardah 5.46 27.01 6.45 3.02 30.74 37. Baruipur 2.34 38. Kalyani 0e47 9.57 N.A.A. 14.77 5.59 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 36.81 0.61 1.55 25.50

N.B. /1 No figures as Ulberia is a newly formed municipality -22-

4.4 Design and A2vraisal of the Municipal Developm~nt Programme 4.4.1 Establishing the Size of the CUDP !II Programme The share of the overall CUDP III 5 year investment programme allocated to the MDP programme was determined by the West Bengal Urban Development Strategy Committee in consultation with CMDA. In passing, it should be noted that the Committee recommended a smaller CUDP III investment programme than initially advocated by CMDA, this reflecting the Committee's different State-wide priorities. Taking into account the previous development experience and its own decentralisatiorn objectives, the Committee recommended that an increased share of the overall CMA investment budget be allocated to the local bodies outside the metrocore. It also advocated the active participation of the elected municipal bodies in the planning and implementation of local level schemes.

The total size of the CUDP III programme was set at Rs. 330.00 crores (US$ 347..30m) of which Rs. 42.00 crores (US$ 44.2m) represented cost and time overruns on the previous investment programmes. A total of Rs. 76 crores (US$ 80.0m) has been allocated to the 37 local bodies outside the Calcutta and Howrah Municpal Corporations. An additional Rs. 11.00 crores (US$ 11.55 million) and Rs 7.0 crores (US$ 7.35 million) respectively has been allocated to Calcutta and Howrah ward level schemes making an overall MDP investment total of Rs. 94.00 crores (US$ 98.90m). The 37 municipalities account for roughly 40% of the CMA's population of 1981 and 36% of the new CUDP III investment (excluding spillover, design, supervision and management).

The allocation of MDP investment programme across each of the local bodies was made by the State Government on the basis of their individual share of the total CMA population, as given by the 1981 Census. Within each individual allocation the municipalities have been responsible for the selection of their sector priorities and sectoral investment allocations. Table 6 sets out the demographic characteristics of the 39' local bodies and the CUDP III investment allocations made to each under the MDP. 4.4.2 Establishing the Sector Priorities

Each local body was free to set its own sectoral investment priorities within the constraint of its CUDP III 5 year investment allocation and within the general design guidelines laid down by State Government. These guidelines cover the following aspects;

i) in reconciling competing sector investments, priority was to be given to the sectors providing for the basic needs of the population, e.g. provision of the minimum water supply was viewed as being more important than a community hall TABLE 6: MUNICIPAL DEMOGRAPHiIC CHIARACTE'RISTICS &t CUDP III MIDP INVESTMENTS KEY INDICATORS

P 0 P) U L A T I 0 N Ac ap Analtc 19111 Pain NmuoCoprto Gross oIi CopoaItion Pop)1I. 191a fPoptiat i rlacplt/(F.x.c1Iud GCrow.tl r cuti.p.I on cuI)P- Notified Area ing' 19 91 I DVnEi ty 1931 11investment, 1971 Out P.atc(".) Are z (Persons/ FWS Under M1DP Growth) (Projected) (1971-U81 Population (Scq.rw.n~ Sq.KI. ()2) U%(qts)LS5 (3) (4) s Crores 5$(n 1. Calcutta mun. ()j(7) Corp. 3,148,746 3,291,655 2. lowrah Mun. Corp. 3,300,000 Ls______1(1 N.A. 742,298 0.45 104.00 1,481,245 3. South Suburban 1,200,000 31,651 (45%) 272,600 N.A. 61. 50L 12,070 11.00 11.7 4 . Bhatpara 3 8 0 , L 600,000 541,878 (7 204,750 0 00 3.94 30.38 3%) 7.00 7.4 5. Jadavpur 263,o000L2 300,000 12,508 252,700(66.5%) 140,118 2.85 12.95 6.50 6.8 6. Kamarhati 249 ,424 300,000 197,250 20,309 (75%) 169,404 7.80 N.A. 4.00 4.2 7. South Dum 240,418 276,000 N.A. 149,654 (601) Dum 174,342 4.20 10.96 4.00 4.2 8. Panilhati 227,578 300,000 14 4 ,251 21,936 (60%) 148,280 3.05 16.50 4.00 4.2 9. Garden 205,546 282,500 91,031 13,793 (40%) Reach 154,913 3.86 19.43 4.00 4.2 10. Barranagar 191,389 250,000 123,328 10,580 (601) 1 36, 84 2 167,848 2.35 12.95 14,779 3.70 3.9 11. Bally 180,000 2.26 11 4 ,833 (601) N.A. 137,723 7.12 134,278 3.44 3.6 12. Uluberia Z2 200,000 N.A. 23,574 (80%) N.A. 11.81 '~11,662 3.00 3.1 13. Hlooghly-Chinsurah 1 2 3 , 0 0 0aL2 156,000 103,292 (75%) 105,241 N.A. 46 .62 2. 48 2.6 14. Serampore 126,0002 200:000 2,638 73,800 (60%) 102,023 1.97 16 .3 8 2.4 5 2.6 15. Naihati 126,918 160,000 7,692 107,100 (85%) 82,080 2.44 5.88 2.3 3 2 .4 16. Barrackpore 114,165 Z2 140,000 21,585 76,151 (60%) 96,889 3.91 4.3 5 2.28 2.4 17. Titagarh 112,000 135,000 68 ,4 99 26,245 (60%) 88,218 1.56 11.64 2.00 2.1 18. Chandernagar 10 4 ,43 9 125,000 53,760 9,6 14 (48%) 75,238 1.84 3 .24 1.96 2.0 19. North 101,568 120,000 88,773 3 2,2 34 (85%) Barrackpore 76,335 3.50 9.70 1.88 2.0 81,290 90,000 10,470 40.627 (40%) 21. Nrtsh Dma u 0.65 8.42 1.83 1.9 63,873 96,019 52,839 9,620 (65%) 21 iha63,486 1-39,000 5.00 1.80 1.9 2 2. llalisahar 80,987 /2 120,000 15.60 67,213 68,906 2.76 6.48 6,155 (701) 1.74 2 3. Kancharapara 94 ,000[r2 117,000 12, 5030 48,592 1.8 78,768 3. 64 8.29 (60%) 1.71 24. Uttarpara 90,000 110,000 70,500 11,339 1.8 - Kotrung 67,568 L.43 9.06 (715) 1.62 1.7 25. Bansberia 7939 100,000 36,000 9,934 . t 62,000 1.75 7.25 (40%) 1.59 1.7 26. Champdani 77,000/> 104,000 10,952 31,760 58,596 2. 42 9.07 (401) 1.54 27. Baidyabati 76,125 100,000 8,490 58,520 1.6 54 ,130 2.90 6.50 (76%) 1.46 1.5 28. Buidge 70,431 12 90,000 11,712 45,675 (60%) Budge 51,039 3.00 12.03 1.41 1.5 29. Garuilia 66,000 5,855 52,823 (75%) 44 ,2 71 90,000 2.90 L_U 1.2 30. Barasat 57,309 ~2 80 000 7.77 8 ,4 94 46,200 42,642 2.95 6.47 (701) 1.15 31. Bhadreswar 66,000 L2 100:000 37,251 8,858 (60%) 1.2 45 ,48 6 5.48 19 .25 1.14 1.2 32. New Barrackpore 58,747 75,000 42,900 3, 42 9 (651) 32,512 2.90 6.47 1.04 1.1 33. Rajpur 46,534 65,000 9,080 35,248 (60%) 34,393 4.31 17.16 1.03 1.1 34. Dum Dum 44,039 70,000 27,920 2,712 (60%) 31,363 2.81 20.98 1.00 1.1 35. Konnagar 36,348 60,000 2,100 28,185 (641) 34 ,424 1.60 2.90 .1.00 1.1 36. Khardah 5 1,204 60,000 9,087 12,534 (25%) 32,302 4 .87 4.33 1.00 1..1 37. Baruipur 45,282 58,500 11,825 4 0 ,4 51 (79%) 20,501 4 .02 4.19 1.00 L.1 38. Kalyani 27,081,I 39,350 2 9,4 33 10,807 (65%) N.A.A. 18,310 3.21 9.07 1.00 1.1 39. GayeShIpur 37, 000- 70,000 2,986 20,311 (75%) N.A.A. N.A. 10.2 21I.9 1 1.00 1.1 41,239 52,000 11,100 1,689 (30%) N.A. 30.00 24 1.00 1.1 TOTA1.: 6,080,689 ,7 43 1 ,3 75 (60%) 8,227,003 10,014,350 0.75 0.8 - 618. 61/ 1,2,396;-' 4,659,201 (571) 9 ;i.00 99).0 h 1.83981 Con±tis doos n t giqVe populIat i On f I outgrow'L-h±; -~cpar.atel nre I W~ I. u:nuuii1 711 j.it y. Therefore, for tmniciIIik1 I tI'sI a nd I ho I r respoc t Ivte been es t md ted. it IL-;h.ini . nuitq,owthus, r.uiLucipil 1populat ionl hazs Theewi muruicipali r:i at have Outgrowthis .1;uI rc :1andbook(h Of MUnicipal Admi ni151rat. ion, I I.I , ;hi. Tha

ii) technical design standards were to be modest with preference given to those technologies ensuring the utilisation of local labour and resources and avoiding the use of scarce materials iii) service delivery norms were to reflect the minimum needs approach of the programme iv) priority was to be given to investments targetted at the urban poor (the economically weaker section, EWS) v) the population of each municipality was to be canvassed for its views on the proposed investments by the elected representatives and ward committees. Subject to the above constraints, these views were to be reflected in the investment programmes. Tables 7 and 8 set out the physical design standards and service delivery norms that have been drawn up by CGMDA in discussion with the local bodies for the MDP. All MDP investments appraised fall within these norms. In establishing sectoral priorities the local bodies have been assisted by CMDA's.AMEU and sector staff, who have been responsible for drawing up the physical design standards and service delivery norms for each sector, advising the municipalities on the preparation of preliminary sector programme costs and compliance of the proposed programmes with the specified design and service delivery norms. CMDA's AMEU also assisted the municipalities in resolving sectoral investment conflicts to ensure consistency with the overall State Government sectoral investment priorities and the relative magnitude of the service deficiency problem in each sector. For example, in cases where substantial financial provision was initially being made for commercial projects such as markets, to the neglect of basic needs sectors such as water supply, drainage or bustee improvement, AMEU advised that reallocation of investment be made.

Table 9 presents a summary of the sector break-down of the MDP investments by municipality which has resulted from this process. Over 72% of the finalised total MDP investment programme has been allocated to 'basic needs' sectors (water supply, drainage, bustee improvement, service privy conversion and solid waste management). A further 20% of the total investment has been allocated to local road improvements and fdr the provision of local street lighting.

4.5 Designinq and Institutionalising the Appraisal Process Given the complexity of the>MDP covering 2 municipal corporations, 37 municipalities and over 22,000 individual schemes, it was essential to establish a consistent set of appraisal criteria at the outset. Three overriding objectives have guided the design of the MDP appraisal process. -25-

TABLE 7: PHYSICAL DESIGN STANDARDS MDP

Sector Minimum Design Standards Maximum Design Standards

Water Supply a) Concentrated Population deep tubewells with secondary grid connected secondary distribution to primary grid, house- system; provision of connections stand pipes for urban poor

b) Dispersed Population spot tubewells

Drainage unlined surface drains brick-lined or cement brick connected to trunks with work surface drains with proper outfalls concrete slab covers at critical locations, connected| to proper outfalls Service Privy sanitation disposal units sanitary latrines with Conversion to seat level of twinpit septic tank chamber and flush type soak well with super- structure in masonery or connected to sewer system wherever they exist of required capacity Solid Waste hand cart and inter- tractor-trailer and Management mediate vat collection, intermediate vat final disposal by tractor collection, final trailers disposal by tractor trailers and mechanical dumpers; pilot composting plants Local road brick paved roads, street black-topped metallic improvements lights on steel posts with roads protected against and street overhead wiring erosion, street lights illuminaton on steel poles with overhead wiring

Bustee provision of shallow provision of water taps improvement tubwells, street lighting, and standpipes, inter- open surface drainage, mediate vats for solid community sanitary latrines, waste collection, open brick paved pathways surface drainage, community sanitary latrines, brick paved pathways -26-

Sector minimum Design Standards Maximum Design Standards -

Markets tubular structures with concrete structures with asbestos roofing and brick same services as paved flooring, water supply minimum standard but also solid waste collection, with provision of lighting, open drainage, parking spaces brick paved circulation system Parks and wire fencing on timber posts, brick wall playgrounds or metal basic seating arrangements boundary fence, basic seating, basic play facilities, illumination Cremation proper boundary wall proper boundary wall and grounds repairs/reconstruction covered areas for mourners, of steps and protective protective works against works erosion, repairs/ reconstruction of steps. -27-

TABLE 8: SECTOR SERVICE DELIVERY NORMS FOR THE MDP

Sector Minimum Maximum Sub-project component Service Delivery Norms Service Delivery Norms

Water Supply 5 gpcd 25 gcdp

Drainage component specific: component specific waterlogging per % waterlogging per 100% target population target population

Service Privy 1 communal privy 1 communal privy Conversion 25 population 10 population

Solid Waste component specific: component specific: Management tons collected per tons collected pet target population 100% target population

Local road target population target population improvements within 20 minutes walk within 5 minutes walk of nearest metalic road of nearest metallic road

Bustee improvement component specific municipal service municipal service improvements per improvements per % 100% target target population population

Markets provision of 50 sq.ft. provision of 600 sq.ft. covered space/l,0oo covered space/l,OOO people people

Parks and playgrounds basic improvements to basic improvements to existing facilities existing facilities, provision of additional park/playground areas

Cremation Grounds maintenance of provision of hygienic current facilities facilities for disposall of bodies.

-- ~- -.-- TABLE 9: SUMMARY OF MDP SECTORAL INVESTMENT ALLOCATION BY MUNICIPALITY

tRs- il l Ltikh S E C T otir'.'of C.poijr*.tlon 0 Rn s Cnnversiron nustee Roads £ NusitcipjItty/ Witdf Parks of Servi Cle Solid waste lmprove- Street Notified Ar-a Suipply Drainage Play- Cotnnunaty I L Privy uagement mlkeL I.ighting Harkets grou-Is )laIl: mSscell.neousIi Twal (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 463 (7) (8) 1. Calcutta hun. Corp (9) (10) (II 250.00 300.00 - 200.00 300.00 (12j 2. llowrah Hun. Corp. 100.00 50.00 - - - - 259.20 - 340.60 1i0O.00 1. South Suburban - - - - 116.00 221.50 10.10 40.50 - 700.00 4. Ohatpara 21.50 187.60 25.40 22.25 105.03 69.24 26.00 - 5.15 650.00 21.82 64.95 94.77 5.19 5. Jadavput 91.80 112.00 10.00 - 3.00 400.00 24.30 13.77 23.00 103.85 6. Kamachatl 19.71 10.22 - 1.35 69.00 105.00 17.00 39.00 400.00 7. South 11.00 84.00 45.00 15.00 Duut Duma 109.86 100.99 26.00 8.00 5.00 400.00 20.25 27.00 90.00 16.00 8. Panihatl 108.00 91.45 7.90 - - 400.00 10.26 18.44 43.72 60.75 9. Garden Reach 23.04 20.82 15.56 - 1.00 44.73 47.45 6.13 88.01 307.00 10. Barranagar 112.70 19.24 1.35 - 28.00 64.00 16.00 15.60 1.35 344.00 11. Bally 16.00 138.40 20.00 - - 47.82 55.64 40.00 2.00 300.00 23.50 13.50 45.00 13.12 12. Uluberia 56.00 5.50 3.92 - 12.00 20.00 11.00 50.00 248.00 13. flooghly-Chinsuwah 86.00 10.00 - 30.27 57.84 40.98 245.00 14. Sera.pote 21.50 3.62 59.59 15.50 2.70 100.31 50.74 22.05 1.50 - 1.0 233.00 15. Halhatl - 51.40 2.00 - - 39.07 55.00 27.L5 15.08 - 228.00 16. Barrackpore 30.39 7.45 21.60 3.26 - 65.48 67.42 16.67 8.57 1.00 200.00 17. 6.06 25.00 3.37 1.13 Titagarh 39.00 54.40 15.00 - 2.30 196.00 15.00 33.50 17.00 7.00 18. Chandernagar 34.05 51.90 2.00 - 5.10 188.00 32.00 3.75 12.00 37.80 10.00 19. North Barrackpore 73.22 27.94 1.50 - - 183.00 40.50 4.54 5.61 21.96 20. North Dum Du. 47.50 3.36 1.98 - 0.57 20.00 4.00 4.50 180.00 . 21. Rlshra 5.00 75.00 13.00 1.00 4.00 35.57 28.62 13.77 21.69 - 174.00 22. lIalIsahar 9.05 40.87 10.13 11.30 28.55 78.58 16.20 - - 171.00 - 4.10 34.57 - ad 23. Kgaicharapara 16.74 - - - 152.00 37.48 16.74 10.06 11.62 24. ittarpara - Kotrun 27.09 34.96 4.31 - 40.08 17.88 34.35 9.52 - 159.00 25. BAnsberla - 23.11 27.61 1.45 8.62 32.20 4.13 1.28 - 154.00 26. Chamipdanl 4.58 27.51 14.41 2.45 2.50 1.00 37.00 19.00 12.50 11.50 41.12 100.00 27. Baldyabati 7.00 25.50 1.5.00 10.50 44.00 22.00 21.00 - 1.00 2.00 141.00 2.00 - 25.00 - 28. Budge buodge 4.40 14.59 2.00 - 1.00 117.00 6.87 - 17.00 57.34 10.00 29. Gaculla 37.73 1.80 - 3.00 29.64 13.36 4.30 16.20 115.00 30. Barasat 12.77 - - - 25.00 19.00 2.50 6.00 - 114.00 31. Bh3dteawar 2.00 20.00 15.00 6.00 - 25.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 0.50 104.00 32. New Barrackpore 27.00 11.00 15.00 9.00 - 20.00 29.80 2.00 2.39 - 103.00 33. Rajipur - 35.31 10.00 0.50 - 7.36 17.08 10.13 - 100.00 34. Dui Dut 5.05 2.47 28.21 10.71 9.25 16.78 16.58 2.88 6.99 2.73 100.00 7.36 10.18 43.09 - 35. Konnagar 7.43 43.30 3.13 - - 6.75 5.40 6.75 100.00 36. Khardah 18.90 8.10 0.34 - 1.69 28.35 20.93 10.80 9.45 .1.35 100.00 37. (sarulpur 4.05 25.07 - 0.67 - 25.20 31.00 11.00 6.00 0.68 100.00 38. Kalyant N.A.A. 4.73 38.75 28.82 - - 29.00 8.00 - 4.00 0.50 146.00 39. Gayeshpur 8.00 26.00 21.00 4.00 - N.A.A. 17.19 12.53 4.05 - 100.00 4.51 8.82 19.76 4.86 2.68 - 0.60 75.00 TOTAL; 1,987.65 2.048.00 888.69 599.69 1,241.21 1,896.12 496.25 170.73 25.41 45.98 9,400.00 I Distribution by 21.1i 21.79 9.45 6. 3 13.20 20.17 5.28 SeCtor 1.82 0.27 0.49 | lOs I

buet o.j (Gt.it !iMtu . . .Ir;.I I (t;. ovan.ttt -29-

(i) the process should provide the local bodies with a useful operational tool, both for the MDP and subsequent programme appraisals

(ii) the appraisal process should also represent the basis for the subsequent monitoring of programme and municipal performance during implementation and over the operational life of the programme iii) the process should incorporate not simply a socio-economic and financial analysis of the sector investments proposed but, in the light of the CUDP I and II experience, an assessment of the financial and institutional sustainability of the programme and any major implementation issues. To reflect these objectives CMDA's AMEU drew up a standard appraisal format for each of the 39 local bodies. These formats include the following appraisal elements: Appraisal Formats

(a) Key municipal indicators of: (i) population growth and density (ii) urban poverty (iii) municipal revenue and expenditure performance (iv) MDP programme (investment, sectors, staffing, land acquisition requirements and implementation time table) (b) MDP sector summary of: (i) inves'ment costs (ii) existing and target service delivery levels (iii) physical design standards (iv) target beneficiaries (v) percentage urban poor (EWS) of target beneficiaries (c) Key socio-economic impact summary of MDP (i) justification and pro)gramme benefits (ii) economic benefit summary (iii) distribution of benefits and poverty analysis (d) Key implementation issues (i) institutional/staffing arrangements and requirements (ii) implementation schedule and agency responsibilities (iii) related investment issues (iv) sector specific financial issues (e) Key revenue and expenditure performance indicators (i) annual revenue and expenditure performance targets to be achieved

Each of the 39 local bodies was responsible for completing the appraisal of its MDP programme, which has been undertaken on a sectoral basis, in consultation with CMDA's AMEU. The appraisal formats were then submitted to AMEU for discussion and approval before the municipality could start work on detailed design preparation. For purposes of illustration, Annex 1 sets out the finalised, approved appraisals for the municipalities of Bansberia and Hooghly Chinsura. The appraisal process resulted in a series of further revisions to the municipalities' initial sector investments. Four sets of changes in particular stand out. First an overall increase in the provision for investment in the secondary grids of those local bodies benefitting from metropolitan trunk water supply projects. Second an overall reduction in the provision made to the drainage sector because of uncertainties concerning improvements to major outfalls (themselves the responsibility of the State Irrigation Department or CMDA). Third a major reduction in the amount allocated to market improvements largely on the basis of such projects not being financially viable and not meeting basic service delivery needs. Fourth, a significant downwards revision to the estimate of the number of additional staff required by the municipalities to implement the MDP. In a period of 14 months, the sectoral investment proposals of all 39 local bodies have been successsfully appraised and .approval given for the preparation of individual scheme estimates by CMDA's AMEU. Annex 2 presents a summary of the complete MDP appraisal across all 39 local bodies and 10 sectors.

Annex 3 summarises the staff requirements of the MDP that have been drawn up by the local bodies in consultation with CMDA and DLB and which are required to implement the MDP*. The DLB is responsible for ensuring that these staff requirements are met.

* These are additional to one Executive, one Finance and one Health Officer being deployed to each local body by the Government of West Bengal. -31-

SeO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MDP

5.1 Implementation Functions and Processes

In order to implement the MDP, CMDA has established a Directorate for the Municipal Development Programme (DMDP), the main functions of which are to:

(i) co-ordinate the implementation of the MDP across the local bodies

(ii) provide guidance to the local bodies in the preparation of their schemes

(iii) examine, approve and distribute funds against individual scheme estimates

(iv) collect and compile information on the physical and financial progress of each scheme, summaries of which are to be forwarded to the AMDA's PMU

(v) collect and maintain financial records and accounts relating to the MDP.

In order to properly execute these tasks the DMDP has established five zonal co-ordinatiiig and monitoring centres (ZCMC's) and two conrolling offices in the form of regional co-ordinating and monitoring centres (RCMC). These centres deal with all the local bodies with the exception of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation which is dealt with directly by the DMDP.

All day-to-day contact with the municipalities is through the ZCMC's with the RCMC's acting as monitoring and co-ordinating centres. Final approval for scheme estimates rests with a Municipal Works Committee and a Regional Municipal Works Committee.

The implementation process is illustrated in Figure 2. Once the local bodies have had their programmes appraised and approved by CMDA's AMEU, they prepare estimates for each scheme in each sector following the guidelines provided by the DMDP for submission to their zonal offices and illustrated in Annex 4.

The zonal offices extend guidance to the local bodies in the preparation of estimates and each local body is encouraged to fill out a preliminary set of forms before formally making their submissions. Standard estimates are required for all schemes and consist of four forms; a synoptic report of the scheme; a financial estimate of the scheme; a schedule of items and supporting plans and drawings. These forms are set out in Annex 5. Otnce the estimates are received by the zonal offices they are examined for consistency with the guidelines given by DMDP relating to specification, norms, standards and general technical feasibility. These in turn are consistent with the sector specific guidelines set out at appraisal by the AMEU. FIGURE 2: MDP IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

Preparation of Z.CM.C. R.C.M.C. MWC/RMWC Direccor's Office Municipat ty a) Examination a) Financial Exarnination and a) of estimate Processing for scrutiny approval of issuance of AAFS b) Recording b) Processing for scheme b) Recording I MWC/RMWC 15 30 c ) issue of AAF.S 14 31 35

Municipality Z.C.M.C. Director's Office Z.C.M.C. a) Taking resolution for a) Examination of a) Examination by a) Recording loan liability Ist advance finance b) Drawingof cheque b) Preparation of 1st demand b) Recording and advance demand payment to b) Recording in c) Making pay order Municipality c) Submissic- of (a) & (b) appropriate c) Circulation of to ZCMC register_ payment documents 36 50 51 to RCMC and 55 56 60 Director's Office

Municipality 61 65 Selection of Agency for construction works 65 Note: For estimates of up to Rs. 10,000 approval by MWC/RMWC will not be required and total time required for approval will be 50 days

r I 1 If approved, the estimates are regional forwarded to the appropriate office which examines the estimates for consistency financially and with the sector investment allocation appraisal. Each estimate made at is also categorised by the RCMC according to the value of the scheme. Schemes in excess of Rs 1 lakh are then forwarded to the Municipal schemes of Works Committee and less than Rs 10,000 to the Director DMDP approval. Urpon clearance for by the relevant authority, approval for ea&"-h scheme is given to the local body by the Director DMDP. The Board of Commissioners of the local body then moves a resolution accepting the loan liabilities for the and responsibility future upkeeo and maintenance of and forwards the assets created copies to the zonal office of DMDP. receipt of this resolution Upon the the scheme becomes credit effective and the funds are released by the zonal office on the basis of a pre-set formula. This formula varies of the scheme. according to the size In general an amount of 50% of the estimate value or Rs 1 lakh, whichever is balance smaller, is advanced and the released in instalments. Final payment receipt of is made on the a completion report from the local body. Figure 1 also sets out the time frame in days for activity to be each completed once the estimate is received the locvsal body by the zonal from office. In all, a maximum of 65 days is involved for larger schemes less and 50 days for schemes of than Rs 10,000 to the receipt of final first payment. approval and the

5.2 Implementation Progress Although the MDP is still in its infancy, progress first six months over the has been most encouraging. For example: (i) there is evidence that the revenue performance of the local bodies has improved substantially in the current financial year. In Hooghly Chinsurah assessment for example, has increased by 30% over that previous of the year and collection by 20% (ii) over 200 staff have already been deployed to the local bodies. That is equivalent to roughly 50% of the total MDP five year implementation requirement (iii) over 300 individual estimates have been received from of the 39 local bodies. 22 (iv) approval has already been given to 64 schemes to a total amounting value of Rs 3 crores (US$ 3.15 million). -34-

By way of example, Table 10 illustrates the list of schemes submitted up to the time of a World Bank supervision Mission in November 1983 by the Municipality of Hooghly Chinsurah. Up to that point the Municipality had submitted some twenty schemes for approval, received clearance for thirteen, had started construction on three and completed two. At the time of the mission, the Municipality had engaged some 30 contractors by competitive tender. Of its own initiative, googhly-Chinsurah was also in the process of making an educational film about the MDP with a view to fostering a greater civic awareness of the programme among the local community. 5.3 Monitoring and Evaluation of MDP 5.3.1 Monitoring During Programme Implementation Two specific monitoring activities are being undertaken during the implementation of the MDP: (i) quarterly monitoring of the actual/estimated physical and financial progress on all schemes in each sector and local body

(ii) quarterly monitoring of actual/estimated revenue and expenditure performance for each local body Both streams of activities have been integrated into a quarterly monitoring and reporting process with specific responsibilities. This process is illustrated in Figure 2. Physical and Financal Progress Monitoring Quarterly physical and financial progress reports will be prepared for each scheme by each local bcdy using standard formats (illustrated in Table 11 for bustee improvement works) and submitted to the CMDA's five zonal co-ordinating and monitoring centres. These zonal offices will collect and collate the information from the local bodies and forward it to the regional co-ordinating and monitoring centres where quarterly physical and financial progress reports are prepared by sector and local body. These reports are sent to the Director, Metropolitan Development and the Programme Management Unit at CMDA headquarters with the latter responsible for the overall physical and financal management of the programme and for reporting to the Government of West Bengal, Government of India and World Bank. The reporting formats have been designed to be computer ised and this task will be undertaken by PMU once CMDA's new computer is installed and operational in early 1984. -35-

TABLE 10: LIST OF MDP SCHEMES SUBMITTED BY HOOGHLY-CHINSURAH MUNICIPALITY TO-DATE (November 1983)

Name of Scheme Est. cost Status (Rs)

Roads

1. brick on edge pavement at 49,385 pavement done Kalitols (Chutiabazar)

2. improvement of Tewaripara 13,903 work yet to be taken Rd. from Stn. Rd. Jn. up

3. brick flat pavemernt at 16,083 under tender call Bagdipara Lane on Karbala (West) Jiban Paul2s Garden

4. brick llat pavement at 10,140 under tender call Bunomasjid Lane H/O Sri K.P. Bhattacharyya to H/O P.N. Sutar

5. improvement of Khan- 240,545 tender to be invited Pukur. Rd. from Sarat Sarani to M. Rd

6. improvement of 81,460 under tender call Wnzidnagore Rd. frm Sahaganj Main Rd. to culvert near Bhatri Sangha playground

7. improvement of 140,763 bituminous work done Kapasdanga Rd. from sonatuli to Sarat Sarani

8. improvement of 55,331 under tender call Kulihanda Rd. from M.K. Hat to Pearabagan link Rd.

9. improvement of Kalitola 55,331 under tender call Rd. starting from Carbati Rd. Jn. to Senpara Rd. Jn. -36

Name of Scheme Est. cost Status (R~)

10. improvement of Strand Rd 170,774 tender to be invited to Uttar Chanderangore from Tulapatighat to Chandernagore Corpn. limit

11. improvement of 5,161 bituminous work in Acnapurna Colony Rd progress starting from St. John School to Tank side

12. brick pavement at Pound 70,546 under tender call Lane from Chankbazar to Sarat Sarani

13. Improvement of Keota Lat 109,531 under tender cal Began Rd.

14. improvement of Duttaghat 75,171 under tender call Lane from Collegiate School to Kanigoli including Paul's Lane

15. brick pavement at Lenin 35,638 under tender call Palli starting from Manaspur Rd.

16. construction of Sahaganj 141,010 under tender call roadside drain starting from Keote P.S. to Sahanganj main Culvert

Water Supply - laying of pipe lines

17. laying of pipe line for Est. scheme submitted 24.11.83 line for water supply value 316,380 at Chowmatha and Sendeswartala via Dutta Gali (Ward nos: 24 part, 25 entire, 26 part)

18. laying of pipe lines at Est. scheme j submitted 15.11.83 Jhappukur Netaji Nagar value 14,814 Phulbagan (Ward no: 2)l

Solid Waste Management

19. estimate for garbage disposal resubmitted to SW%M schemes amounting to Un it/CMDA Rs 36,286 and Rs 111,542,70 on 11.11.83 -37-.

TABLE 11: QUARTERLY PHYSICAL AND FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORT Quarter ending on...... 198*..... Sub Head: BUSTEE IMPROVEMENT WORKS

Code No:

Estimated Amount Expected date of completion Up to last InU, C financial year. a) - w4 (Rs in Lakh)

Q4 2During current r t > financial year *Da) (Rs. in Lakh)

Total Cumulative (Rs. in Lakh) C.I.S.S. Pipe M Water point No. Hard Tube-Wells No. Deep Tube-Wells No. Latrine with spk. uz tank ... No . u, Latrine connected h- to cover .... No. o a Pit Privey .... No. 4_WRoad Pavement....M .- Block top road...M U Street light....No. u o Pucca drain.....M Um- Lined drain.....M s Kutcha drain....M 4 Underground drain ...... M

Signature ...... Signature ...... Counter signed

Accunts Officer of Engineer in charge of Mayor/President/ - the Municipality/Corpn. the Mun1cipa_-ty/Corp- Chairman/Administrator -38-

In addition to the quarterly progress monitoring CMDDA's OMDP is responsible, through its regional and zonal offices, for maintaining close working relationships with the local bodies, reviewing and advising on day-to-day physical and financial progress and for inspecting specific schemes as they are implemented on a regular basis. Current Account Performance Monitoring

The Directorate of Local Bodies (DLB) under LGUDD is responsible for the collection and analysis of quarterly current account performance statistics for each local body. During the first fiscal year of the CUDP III, 1983-84, the local bodies all receive a capital investment provision based on population share. O-.r this period the main role of DLB is to collect and analyse statistics on the fiscal performance of each local body in terms of the current account performance targets described in section 4.3.2 and to advise the individual local bodies of their progress and of potential problems.

This particular activity is critical because as explained in secton 4.3.2, the first year's current account fiscal peformance of each local body relative to its targets determines the size of its second year capital investment provision.

Integration of Monitoring Functions

The information streams and recommendatCions flowing from both the physical and financial progress and financial performance monitoring are fed into the independent Appraisal, Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (AMEU) on a quarterly basis.

This Unit is responsible for recommending to State Government and CMDA the MDP investment allocation by local body and sector for subsequent financial years (Figure 3).

In making this recommendation, AMEU will take into account the advice and reports received from CMDA's MDP on physical and financial progress made in specific sectors and local bodies and on financial performance by DLB. The investment decision made by the State Government and CMDA for each subsequent year's allocation of investment on the basis of AMEU's recommendations is termed the 'trigger mechanism', described in section 4.3.3. FIGURE 3: MONITORING DURING IMPLEMENTATION

LOCAL BODY CMDA - ZCMC CMDA - RCMC Quarterly, physical and Collection and assembly financial progress Preparation of of quarterly reports by estimate. Progress Progress summaries - report by estimate quarterly revenue by > by sector and and municipality by ekpenditure performance + municipality statements

DLB,GOWB h STEERING GROUP Collection and assembly H1fligh level Conmittee of quarterly Progress I- 4, to decide up on next report on revenue and FY's - - - -- investment expenditture performance allocation to each local body ("trigger mechanism")

GOWB - DLB CMDA - AMEU DMDP/PMU - CMDA Review of quarterly Progress Aiding the Steering reports on fiscal performance Group Review of quarterly with AMEU's recommendation by municipality and physical and financial on investment allocation recommendations to AMEU progress summaries by during next FY by sector sector and municipality and municipality and recommendation to AMEU

,. -40-

5.3.2 Monitoring During Programme Operation The task of monitoring the performance of the MDP against its broad progranme objectives rests with AMEU. For this purpose the Unit is currently identifying key fiscal and socio-economic indicators against which the operational performance of the programme will be assessed and reported on annually. The key indicators being developed are designed to assess how the programme performs against the targets set at appraisal in terms of the following types of information: (a) socio-economic (i) actual and target service delivery levels (ii) actual and target beneficiaries (iii) actual and target urban poor (EWS) as a percentage of total beneficiaries (b) fiscal (i) actual and target operational and maintenance costs (ii) actual and target annual revenue generation and direct cost recovery (iii) actual and target employment and income generation. In each case by local body and sector. To refine the socio-economic targets set at appraisal, the AMEU is currently initiating a series of baseline surveys at sample locations in the CMA. These include surveys of existing service delivery characteristics in the water supply, drainage, solid waste management, local road and market sectors. In its annual reporting on programme performance, AMEUt's intent is to keep as closely as possible to the appraisal formats illustrated in Annex 1 with which the local bodies aready have a working knowledge. As well as reporting on the achievement of the MDP's overall programme objectives, AMEU will also be making policy recommendations to CMDA and the State Government about the sectoral and spatial focus of subsequent investment programmes and on any additional financial prerequisites for programme sustainability. To do this, AMEU will undertake a series of evaluative studies of programme performance similar to those previously undertaken for the sector investments made under CUDP I and II and discussed in secton 3.0. -4 1-

6.0 LESSONS FOR OTHER CITIES 6.1 Defining the Problems and Response

The evolution of Calcutta's municipal development programme from its origins in first and second Calcutta Urban Improvement Programmes represents one response to a set of problems that are common to many cities. The essential problems can be summarised as follows:

(i) acute service level and infrastructure deficiencies (ii) regressive impacts of historical investments (e.g. spatial mis allocation of investments relative to distribution of income)

(iii) inadequate institutional and financial capacity of local government to address such problems

(iv) inadequacy of the existing financial regime to properly sustain existing investments

(v) mismatch between the training and outlook of technical staff and affordable and realistic physical design solutions.

The single most important prerequisite for the MDP's success to date is the delegation of specific responsibilities for investment planning and implementation, toget:her with greatly increased autonomy over financial matters to the local bodies, while at the same time maintaining overall programme control and co-ordination at the Metropolitan/State level. The achievement of this devolution is itself the result of a series of major innovations that have taken place over a considerable period. Principal among these are the legislative, institutional and financial reforms and initiatives that have been introduced by the State Government, and described in section 3.1; the State Government's own clearly expressed political commitment to the process of devolution and the emergence of a metropolitan management team made up of a small group of key individuals in different agencies who work informally as a group to co-ordinate the overall urban improvement programme.

The authors are of the view that the devolution of the appropriate responsibilities to the local level, accompanied by the necessary transfer of resources is of equal relevance to two-tier and unitary systems of city government. Indeed, within both the Calcutta and Howrah Municipal Corporation areas, the ward level investments under the MDP are administered by the respective Corporation. -42-

In the CMA the Metropolitan Development Authority (CNDA) undertakes the strategic level planning functions and overseas the metropolitan level investments, which are either implemented by CMDA or increasingly by other agencies. Resource allocation at the local level has been approached under CUDP III by systematically devolving the specific responsibilities for programme design and implementation to the local bodies but within a centrally .organised planning and implementation framework. In devolving functions from the CMDA to the local bodies, responsibilities have been clearly defined at both levels of administration for all stages of the overall process from the generation of sector programmes, their appraisal, the design and implementation of individual schemes to the monitoring and evaluation of programme performance.

Several aspects of the MDP process have application for policymaking and investment planning in cities elsewhere. These are considered below.

6.2 Generation of Sustainable investments Programmes

Under CUDP III the local bodies have been given responsibility for generating sectoral investment programmes within the constraint of an overall annual capital investment budget; for preparing individual scheme estimates for each sector and once approved, for implementing the schemes. However, it has not been assumed that the local bodies can perform these functions without central support and supervision. The new capital investment allocation system introduced under the MDP recognises that it is local people who most acutely feel the needs and deficiencies for which investments in urban improvements are seeking to provide and that they should be able to bring their views and preferences to bear through their elected representatives. The elected representatives are in turn vested with the responsibility of setting specific investment priorities and for the implementation of the schemes directed at achieving those priorities.

The process is initiated by the allocation of an annual capital investment budget to each local body by the State Government. In the first year this allocation is based on relative population size in order to keep the system simple and to expedite the process. Each local body then submits its sectoral programme bid to CMDA for appraisal and if approved for the allocation of capital investment up to the budget level. Whether a local body receives resources to the full extent of its budget depends upon the quality of the bid it makes.

Sectoral programme generation is undertaken by the local bodies but within clearly defined guidelines established by the State Government and CMDA and drawing on the lessons of previous investment programmes. These guidelines relate to existing sectoral deficiencies in infrastructure and service delivery provision and to the physical design and service delivery norms to be followed in programme design. -43-

CMDA has also assisted the local bodies in the accomplishment of this task through the provision of technical support and advice on a continuing basis.

Under a unitary system of city government, devolution of these activities to the local level could be achieved through the creation or strengthening of local offices of the metropolican development agency. As indicated earlier, this is the aproach adopted by the Calcutta and Howrah Corporations in the design, appraisal and implementation of their ward level schemes. 6.3 Evaluation and Appraisal

Several important implications flow from the approach to appraisal and approval adopted for the MDP. First, the importance of a centrally located independent Appraisal, Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (AMEU) reporting directly to the chief officers of the Metropolitan Development Authority and State Government. Independence safeguards the objectivity of the recommendations made to Government at appraisal on the approval of each local body's programme and on the subsequent implementation and operational performance of that programme.

Second, the importance of the studies carried out by the Unit on the impacts of previous urban investment programmes. The recommendations of these studies were subsequently incorporated in the design of the CUDP III investment programme. aowever, the findings of such studies would be equally relevant to policy making in situations where no new major investment programmes were planned. Third, the design of the appraisal process and appraisal formats is both simple and comprehensive. Using these formats appraisals have been successfully completed by all 39 local bodies with the assistance of AMEU. Clearly a major incentive for the local bodies to submit their investment bids in this way is the desire to receive their capital budget allocations for which appraisal is a necessary prerequisite. The appraisal formats have additionally been designed to provide the basis of the subsequent performance monitoring of the programme over its operational life.

Fourth, the direct link established at appraisal between the capital investment programme and the current account performance of each local body with the latter determining the sustainability of each subsequent year's capital allocation. 44-

6.4 Implementation Two aspects of implementation are of particular note. First the role played by CMDA's Municipal Development Department in assisting the local bodies in the design and implementation of specific schemes once approval is received from AMEU for a local body's capital investment programme. As at appraisal, the efficiency of the process is dependent upon the local bodies submitting a set of consistent formats for each scheme to CMDA. To assist the local bodies CMDA has prepared a manual and worked examples of scheme estimates. These have been fully explained to the local bodies in a series of workshops and seminars. Again as with appraisal, each local body must satisfy these requirements in order to receive funding f rom the DMDP.

Second, the relationship established between the current account fiscal performance of the local bodies and the funding of each subsequent year's capital investment programme and implementation by the 'trigger mechanism'. This provides the local bodies with an additional incentive to perform because if the pre-set current account targets are not achieved, capital funds are lost to other more successful local bodies. 6.5 Monitoring of Programme Performance

During implementation the monitoring process is designed to input directly to the decision-making process on each subsequent year's MDP investment allocation to the local bodies. This annual 'trigger mechanism' relies on two streams of monitoring information, the monitoring of each local body's actual current account fiscal peformance against pre-set appraisal targets and the physical and financial progress monitoring of each sectoral investment programme in each local body.

Both monitoring processes are based on standard formats that are designed to be cmputerised and the results of both are analysed by the AMEU, which has responsibility for reporting anually to CMDA and the State Government on overall programme performance and for advising on the specific investment allocation by sector and local body for each subsequent year. AMEU is also responsible for monitoring the peformance of the programme during operation. The objectives being to evaluate programe peformance againnst its broad socio-economic and fiscal goals, to provide a better basis for urban sector policy making and for the design of subsequent investment programmes.

In monitoring the implementation and operational performance of the programme, the clear intent is for the monitoring process to be a decision-making tool. This objective has influenced both the design of the monitoring formats themselves and the establishment of the AMEU as an independent unit with direct access to the chief officers of the Development Authority and State Government. -4 5 -

6.6 Training Initiatives

The establishment of the Institute of Local Government and Urban Studies (ILGUS) and the role that this organisation, together with technical staff of CMDA and State Government have played in the MDP process, has been critical to the success achieved to date. Formal programmes and workshops have and continue to be held for both the elected members of the local bodies and their officers. These activities are supported by the informal day-to-day consultations between technical staff of CMDA and State Government departments and the local bodies.

In assessing the contribution of these training initiatives, two points stand out. First, the quality of the documentation produced to date for the local bodies on all aspects of the MDP ;s very impressive and of potential application elsewhere. Second, the fact that the State Government has received a number of requests from municipalities elsewhere in the State requesting presentations and workshops on Calcutta's Municipal Development Programme.

6.7 Some Costs and Potential Risks of the MDP

While the implementation of the MDP is at a very early stage it nevertheless already appears to be successful. The necessary financial, 7institutional and organisational - structures are in place; the programme design, appraisal, implementation and monitoring procedures are operational; the programme has been appraised, investment funds are being disbursed and schemes constructed.

However, it is important to consider the costs of introducing the changes necessary for the MDP to be introduced and the potential risks. The costs relate principally to staffing. At the local level there has been a requirement for additional staff amounting in total to about 400 persons. This requirement is largely being met by a redeployment from various State Government agencies to the local bodies. At the Metropolitan and State Government level staff requirements have been extremely modest. By way of example, the Appraisal, Monitoring and Evaluation Unit is currently staffed by about ten technical officers, the Unit having undertaken the appraisal of the entire CUDP III programme with only two persons v

The devolution of responsibilities to the local bodies has meant that the specific staff requirements of the MDP could be primarily met by redeployment rather than additional recruitment. The computerisation of the MDP appraisal, implementation and monitoring formats shortly to be implemented by CMDA should also serve to minimise additional staff requirements. -46--

In the longer term two potential risks that could affect the success of the MDP require consideration. First, the possibility that the existing political commitment to the devolution of responsibilities might weaken. The principal concern here being that the State Government might not abide by the rules of the revised grant structure and return to the previous ad hoc allocations of State subventions. At present there is no reason to suppose that this will occur because control of the programme remains with Metropolitan and State Government and the specific responsibilities of the local bodies and Metropolitan and State Government authorities are clearly defined. tlevertheless the future success of the programme does depend upon a continuing commitment to devolution on the part of State Government. Second, there remains the potential risk that the elected representatives of the local bodies and their of ficers may find they cannot cope with the continuing pressures to generate schemes which meet the basic needs requirements of their constituents and which comply with the overall programme design and appraisal requirements, or fail to achieve their financial performance targets. To date, the response of the local bodies to the MDP has been such that these risks appear remote. All the indications suggest that the local bodies are, and will continue to exceed the expectations made of them. Moreover, for those bodies which do not achieve their financial targets, the system is such that their investment programme can be reduced to a level that they are able to sustain. Guidance and advice on programme design, appraisal and implementation is also available to each local body through CMDA's network of zonal and regional offices. To date this consultative process has worked well. - 47 -

Annex 1

SUMMARY APPRAISAL FORMAT FOR MUNICIPAL PROGRAMMES

MUNICIPALITY NAME: BANSBERIA Date: August 1982 a) Key Municipal Indicators

1) 1971 population : 62,000

2) 1981 population (excl. outgrown) : 77,000

3) projected 1991 population 104,000

4) 1971-1981 average annual population growth rate (%) 2.42%

5) Municipal area (sq. Km) 9.07 sq. Km

6) 1981 gross population density 8,490 persons per sq. Km

7) % 1981 EWS of total population 76%

8) average annual municipal capital expenditure 1979-81 : Rs. 5.6 lakhs

9) average annual internal revenue during 1979-81 Rs. 19.5 lakhs

10) average annual collection as % of assessment 89%

CUDP III data

1) Programme investment total 146 lakhs (Rs. 29.2 lakhs/yr)

2) Programme components drainage, roads and street lighting, water supply, solid waste management, markets, bustee improvement, parks and playground conversion of service privies, renovation of burning ghat. - 48 -

3), Staffing

Execucivel Health Finance Enaineer Clerk Accoun- iOver- Others Officer I Officeri Officer r I ant seer I I I I ______I _ j__ I I I I Recruited 1 I ,

I I I 1 . 1 , I ; Recuired I 1 - , ,

I I ______, _ _

4) Land acquisition preliminary negotiation for 2.07 hectares of land required by the programme hlas been initiated by Municipality and expected to be complete.by March 1984. 5) Detailed design preparation started in November 1982 b) MDP Sector Summarv

itnvestment t of Services Oelivery Standard PnysicaL Design TargetrA Sector Cost Cost ElWS Stdndard 'Rs.lakhs) Population of .dget xLiatin; Prop.)sed Populaeion

L. Water supply '25,210 17 .27 i 90 9 litred pcd 97.7 Litres pcd Deep cubewalls, L04.G0 76.0 (20 qpcdl to 6S000 (21.5 gpcdl to 104,0001 secondary distrib- peopLe. 1554 house people. 2000 house utlon line, house !connections connections connections. standposts.i I2. Drainage 31,000 21.23 1 40% of tot3l 651 of total I Lining of open drains. 67,600 76.0 Imunicipal pop'n municpal pop'n cnstruction/impcove- covered vlth covered with !ent of nikhasl and improved drainage improved drainage link dcain, puap set. 3. Service Privy j11.003 7.53 |1422 currently 916 (64%) to be Conversion Conventional bcick-type 720 1lO.0OO unco"verted converted tot seat Level

4. Solid Waste 6,000 4.11 14 metric tons 20 metric tons I oustbin/vats, tractors, 104.000 anagement I collected and 76.0 collected and trailers, hee l barrowe. disposed of daily disposed of daily trenching gcound, brick" (58% of current (f3% of 1991 daily mabde dry chamber for daily production) productioni composting. S. Local Road 38.750 26.54 Bituminous road: situminous road: rmprovement of -ain 104,000C 76.0 Improvements I 39.4 km 39.6 km I oad, link road, con- I Bcick-paved road: arick-paved road: version of muddy roads 4.7 km 14.7 km i nto brick-paved ones. Muddy road: 13.4 km Muddy road: 3.2 km equipments, street 40% improvement In lighting assessibillty to key urban servic s 6. market i28,820 19.74 22 sq.m (237 sq.'t) 25 sq.m (276 sq.itt Pactly concrete, partly 104,000 76.0 per 1000 persons per 1000 I persons i semti-pucca structure, with provision of utilities, vets, parking 7. Sustee 4.725 3.24 I5,000 bustee 12,000 bustee Provision of stand 7,C00 Improvement I dwellers 1L00.00 covered dv-llers covered rosts, paved coads and drains, street lignts, sanitary priviesa'

i. Parks and -- - Parks ?Acks - Playgrounds I Playground Playground

9 :Improvement of 0 500 0.34 | Inadequate Upgrading Provtsitn of water 10 , 003 ourning Chat/ facilities 50 !acillties *iuppLy. lijhting and buri4l Ground i I srraqe rJf v.0(. 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 V*-.*S,,¢O05 71Y3.00 I ...... - - - 49 -

c) Key socio-economic impact summary of MDP

Justification and programme Benefits i) Bansberia's local economy is founded on a mix of both industrial and trading activities. Its industrial base is dominated by jute and rubber industries. ii) The municipality's MDP priorities are based on those of the local population canvassed through the elected representatives. Service delivery norms and design standards represent a minimum cost approach to reducing the major service delivery deficiencies in the existing provision of municipal services. iii) The investment proposed takes account of the timing of investments in metropolitan-wide CUDP III programmes in sectors such as water supply, sewerage and drainage.

Economic Benefits i) the construction works associated with the programme are estimated to provide 165 full-time equivalent jobs directly over a period of five years, equivalent to 0.85% of the estimated 1981 employment in the municipality ii) the operation and maintenance of the assets created are likely to provide 100 full-time jobs directly over the life of the programme iii) the municipality has earmarked the largest share (26.5%) of its total MDP allocation to local roads improvement schemes. This is because most of the existing road network is not able to accommodate the growth in both population and vehicular traffic. Moreover the majority of the refugee colonies located within the municipal area have no access roads, the municipality proposes to improve its major arterial roads and to upgrade the secondary roads especially in the refugee colony areas. Further, the road improvement programme is, based on results of the CUDP II programme, expected to generate major economic benefits through greatly improved accessibility to key urban services and savings in vehicle maintenance costs. - 50 -

iv) the municipality has also set aside 21% of its total MDP allocation to drainage schemes. The drainage problem is very acute and 8 of the 17 wards are susceptible to severe water loggiing during the monsoon season with major disruption to everyday life v) 78% of the total municipal population is currently covered by piped water supply. The Municipality proposes to increase population coverage under piped water supply and also its water production vi) water supply, drainage, service privies conversion, solid waste management and bustee improvemen't are expected to have a major impact on the environmental hygiene and health of the population. The greatest direct benefits will accrue to the urban poor (EWS) who represent 76% of the target population for the bustee improvement and service privie conversion components of the programme vii) in order to strengthen the financial base of the municipality, it has allocated a substantial sum for the improvement of markets, which would both increase the available floor space for trading/business activity and also yield a substantial revenue in terms of increased rentals/premium to the municipality. This provision of increased market floorspace, together with the improvements to the local road system will provide improved facilities at reduced travel costs to traders and consumers over an area beyond that of the municipality.

Distribution of Benefits (Poverty Analysis)

i) It is estimated that for the programme as a whole, 76% of the target population will be urban poor (EWS). This figure increases to 100% for the service privy conversion and bustee improvement programme components. d) Key Implementation Issues

Institutional/Staffing Arrangements i) the State Government has seconded an Executive Officer and 3 other officers are yet to be placed. The municipality's additional requirements are set out on page 2 of this Annex ii) State Government/CMDA will continue to provide technical assistance and training to municipal staff during preparation and implementation of the proqramme. The training effort will be mainly provided by the Institute for Local Government and Urban Studies (ILGUS). - 51 -

Implementation

i) An implementation timetable has been prepared detailed and design work was initiated in November 1982 and implementation commenced in 1983. Land negotiations acquisition are underway for 2.07 hectares required by the municipality to implement the market component the programme. of Ancillary Investment i) Municipal drainage improvements are independent of metropolitan wide investments in this sector. Finance i) The market component is planned to generate surplus. a financial The municipality will be responsible for market development advances, or premiums. The increased impact on turnover would be recouped indirectly through entry tax (Octroi) . e) Key Current Account Performance Indicators These are as set out in Table 4 for the first year of the programme, 1983-84. 52 -

2. MUNICIPALITY NAME: eOOGHLY-CHINSURAE Date: July 1982 a) Key Municipal Indicators Background data on Hooghly-Chinsurah

1) 1971 population . iO05,241

2) 1981 population : 129,338

3) projected 1991 population : 200,000 4) 1971-1981 average annual population growth rate : 2.3%

5) municipal area : 16.38 sq. km.

6) 1981 gross population density : 7,896 per sq. km 7) % 1981 EWS of total population : 65% 8) average annual municipal capital expenditure 1979-81 RS. 26 lakhs 9) average annual internal revenue during 1979-81 : Rs. 10.5 lakhs 10) average annual collection as % of assessment 55% CUDP III data

1) Programme investment total : Rs 233 lakhs (Rs. 46.6 lakhs/yr)

2) Programme, components . water supply, drainage, service privy conversion, solid waste management, local road improvements, perishable food market, bustee improvement, parks and playgrounds, slaughter house - 53 -

3 ) Staf fing Executiv)S Health i Finance Engineerother IOverseer III I I officer ' Officer! officer I Rr I I I III Recrui4ted is i p i i,a

I I ,iI Required l | 1 | 1 |.1t12 | I I I I 112 he tar s o 4) Land acquisition :preliminary negoztiation for 1.21 hectares of land required by the proggramme has been initiated by municipality

5) Detailed design preparation : started in August 1982 (b) MDP Sector Summary

investment of Srvic Delivery Standacd ;S A Cost Total1 Physical Design Target of Target so Sector (Rs lakhsI Cost F xistirig Proposed Standard populationi Population

1. water 30.27 13.00 1 18 gpcd (81.7 Litres 20 gpcd (90.8 Litres Deep tubevell,secondary 180,00, 85.G Supply I pcd) to 104,O00 ped) to 180,000 distribution line, housi people people connection, stand pipes

2. Drainage 57.84 24.82 40% total municipal 60% total municipal Lining of open drains. 1o8,00 I as.o populatLon covered population covered Improvements to existing culverts

3. Sevice Pcivy 40.98 17.59 5,000 currently 3,152 (63%) to be Low cost double-lJit- 17,000 100.C Coversion unconverted converted pour flush latrines

4. Solid Waste 21.50 9.23 19.5 metric tons 60 metric tons Improved machinery 180,000 85.0 Management collected and disposed collected and (tractocs, trailers, (3o0t) of cucrent diily disposed of (60%) wheel barrows) for production inter- of 1991 daily collection. Vats for mediate collection production and disposal

5. LocalIoad S.59 25.57 Bituminous Roadt 90 km Improvement of 10 km Partly black topped, 125,000 85.0 tmprovements Concrete Road: 0.20 km Bituminous Road. partly brick psved Brick Paved Road:32 km 5 km link road to be Muddy Roadt 40 km improved & widened 55% popln. coveced by 35.5 km muddy road to improved road be brick paved facilLties Lighting acrangements improved, 75% popln. covered by improved road facilities

6. Per.shable 15.50 6.65 7.4 sq. a (80 sq.ft. 127 sq. m (137 sq.ft.) Concrete structuce with |180,000 85.0 Food Macket per 1,000 persons per 1,000 persons provision of utilities

7. Bustee 3.62 1.55 Nil 5,000 bustee dwellers Provision of standposts ',o00 100.0 Improvement covered sanitary privies, street| lighting, paved roads

. Parks and 2.70 1.16 4 parks * 2 play- 8 new parks * 1 n.:w Play Cacilities and 180,000 35.0 Play9counds qrounds playtqrounds basic benches with fencing

Improvemtent 1.0 0.43 inadequate/poor Upqradirl' if Shed, washinq and 180,000 35.0 h extension of tacilities ,Ac Ii:i Liqhtinq arrangemints Slaugqhter House 233,0 100.0 - 54 -

c) Xev Socio-Economic Impact Summary of MDP Justification and Programme Benefits

i) Hooghly-Chinsurah is one of the oldest municipalities in West Bengal and its local economy is primarily based on tertiary sector activities.

ii) The proposed investments are based on the priorities of local people canvassed by the elected representatives, and represent a minimum cost approach to reducing major service delivery deficiencies in the provision of municipal services.

iii) The investment proposed in each sector takes account of the inter-relationship between metropolitan wide and local works.

Economic Benefits

i) The construction works associated with the programme are estimated to provide 308 full-time equivalent jobs over a period of 5 years. This is equivalent to 1% of the estimated 1981 employment in the municipality.

ii) The operation and maintenance of the assets created are likely to provide 140 full-time jobs over the life of the programme. Thi,s is equivalent to 0.4% of the estimated employment in 1981 in the municipality.

iii) The municipality has allocated a substantial part of the investment to drainage because of th-e necessity of improving a major canal, which was not included in the metropolitan wide investment sector and without which local drainage improvements would not be possible.

iv) Water supply, drainage, service privies conversion, solid waste management and bustee improvement are expected to have a major impact on the environmental hygiene and health of the population. The greatest direct bene£its will accrue to economically weaker sections who represent 100% of the target population for the bustee improvement and service privy conversion components of the MDP v) The municipality has a high proportion of vehicular traffic relative to total traffic because of its location and economic characteristics. It has therefore proposed a relatively large sum for the improvement of local roads which are in a very poor condition at present. vi) The municipality has allocated funds to a solid waste management project to reduce the environmental hygiene problems currently faced through the inadequate collection and disposal of solid waste. - 55 -

vii) The proposed 'market' programme and the improved local road system will improve the quantity, quality and accessibility to markets. The municipality also expects to generate a large revenue surplus from increased rents, trade licence fees and non-refundable advances from the prospective tenants.

Distribution of Benefits (Poverty Analysis)

(i) It is estimated that for the programme as a whole 85% of the target population will b.e urban poor. This figure increases to 100% in the case of service privy conversion and bustee improvement programme components. (d) Key Implementation Issues i) The State Government has seconded an Executive and.a Finance Officer to the municipality, whose additional staff requirements are set out on page 7 of this Annex ii) CMDA will continue to provide technical assistance and training to municipal staff during preparation and implementation of the MDP. Implementation i) An implementation timetable has been prepared; detailed design work was initiated in August 1982; larn, acquisition negotiations are underway for 1.21 hectares required by the municipality to implement specific components of the programme.

Anclliary Investment i) Municipal drainage improvements are dependent upon the renovation of a major canal which is included in the MDP. The Municipality has therefore made its programme independent of metropolitan wide investments Finance i) The market component is planned to generate a financial surplus. The Municipality will be responsible for market development and grant leases to traders. All applicants will be charged non-refundable advances and the anticipated increase in turnover wll be received through the Octroi tax.

(e) Key Current Account Performance Indicators

(i) These are as set out in Table 4 for the first year of the programme 1983-84. ANNEX 2 MDP SECTORAL INVESTMENT ALLOCATION BY MUNICIPALITY - OVERALL SUMMARY

-Rs. anl.khs) s E C 7 0 R s tJNameof Corporation Convetrsnn Bunitee Roads £9 POarks f Hunicipalityt Water of Servced Solid Waste lmprove- Street Play- Conauultity N;tltied Area Supply Drainage Privy Mlanaqgement sent I-ighting Markets grounds lialls Miscellaneous Total

(1) 2) - I 44) - 51 46f) (7) 48) (9) 410) (11) (12) 1. Calcutta Hun. Corp 250.00 300.00 - 200.00 300.00 50.00 - - - 1100.00 2. Mowrah Nun, Corp. 100.00 - 259.20 - 340.00 - - - - 100.00 3. South Suburban 116.00 221.50 10.10 40.50 21.50 167.60 25.40 22.25 - 5.15(1) 650.00 4. bhatpata 10S.03 69.24 26.00 21.02 64.95 94.77 5.19 10.00 - 3.00(l) 400.00 S. Jadavpur 91.00 112.00 24.30 13.77 23.00 103.85 19.71 10.22 - 1.3si1) 6. gAsarhatl 400.00 69.00 10S.00 17.00 39.00 13.00 04.00 45.00 15.00 8.00 5.00(1) 7. South Duo DuN 400.00 109.06 100.99 26.00 20.25 27.00 90.00 16.00 7.90 - 400.00 S. Panihati 100.00 91.45 10.26 10.44 43.72 60.75 20.02 15.56 - 1.00(1) 307.00 9. Garden Reach 23.04 44.73 47.45 6.13 01.01 112.70 19.24 1.35 - 1.35(1) 344.00 10, barranaqar 20.00 64.00 16.00 15.60 16.00 136.40 20.00 - - 2.00(1) 300.00 11. Rally 41.02 55.64 40.00 23.50 13.50 45.00 11.12 5.50 3.92 - 246.00 12, Uluberia 56.00 12.00 20.00 11.00 50.00 06.00 10.00 - - 245.00 13. llooghly-Chinsurah 30.27 57.14 40.98 21.50 3.62 59.59 15.50 2.70 - 1.0(4) 233.00 14. Setampore 100.31 50.74 22.05 1.50 - 51.40 2.00 - - - 228.00 15. Naihati 39.07 55.00 27.15 15.08 30.39 7.45 21.60 3.26 - 1.00(11 200.009n 16. Barrackpore 65.40 67.42 16.61 6.57 6.06 25.00 3.317 1.13 - 2.30|1) 196.00 17. Titagath 39.00 54.40 15.00 15.00 33.50 17.00 7.00 2.00 - 5.10(1 100.001 18. Chandernagar 34.05 51.90 32.00 3.75 12.00 37.00 10.00 1.50 - - 19. North Barrackpore 73.22 103.00 27.94 40.50 4.54 5.61 21.96 3.36 1.90 - 0.57l() 100.00 20. North Dun Duo 47.50 20.00 4.00 4.50 5.00 75.OD 13.00 1.00 4.00 - 174.00 21, Rlbhra 35.57 20.62 13.77 21.69 9.05 40.07 10.13 11.30 - - 171.0o 22. lalloahat 20.55 70.50 16.20 - 4.10 34.57 - - - - 152.00 23. lanchatapara 16.74 37.40 16.74 10.06 11.62 27.09 34.96 4.31 - - 159.00 24. Uttarpara - gotrun 40.00 17.00 34.35 9.52 - 23.11 27.61 1.45 - 25. Danaberia - 154.00 8.02 32.20 4.13 1.20 4.50 27.51 14.41 2.45 2.50 1.00(1)s1.12(3) 26. Champdani 100.00 37.00 19.00 12.50 11.50 7.00 25.50 15.00 10.50 - 1.00(1)+2.00(2) 101,00 27. Daldyabati 44.00 22.00 21.00 2.00 - 25.00 - 2.00 - 1.00(1) 11M.AO 28. Dudge Budge 4.40 14.59 6.07 - 17.00 57.34 10.00 1.90 - 3.00(1) 115.00 29, Garulla 37.73 29.64 13.36 4.30 16.20 12.77 - - - - 114.00 30. Darasat 25.00 19.00 2.50 6.00 2.00 20.00 15.00 6.00 - 0.50(1) 104.00 31. Ohadreawar 25.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 27.00 11.00 15.00 9.00 - - 103.00 32. New Barrackpore 20.00 29.00 2.00 2.39 - 35.31 10.00 0.50 - - 100.00 33. Rajpur 7.36 17.00 10.13 5.05 2.47 20.21 10.73 9.25 6.99 2.73(1) 100.00 34. Dun Duo 16.70 16.58 2.08 7.36 10.18 43.09 - 3.13 - - 100.00 35. lKonnagar 7.43 43.30 6.75 5.40 6.75 10.90 8.10 0.34 - 1.69(3)*1.35(1) 100.00 36. Khardah 20.35 20.93 10.80 9.45- 4.05 25.017 - 0.67 - 0.68(1) 100.00 37. antuipur 25.20 31.00 11.00 6.00 4.73 38.75 28.82 - - 0.50(1) 146.00 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 29.00 0.00 - 4.00 8.00 26.00 21.00 4.00 - - - 100.00 39. Gayeahpur N.A.A. 17.19 12.53 4.05 4.51 8.82 19.76 4.86 2.68 - 0.60(1) 75.00 TOTAL; 1,987.65 2,048.00 888.69 599.69 1,241.21 1,896.12 496.25 170.73 25.41 45.98 9,400.00 a Diltribution by 21.15 21.79 9.45 6.38 13.20 20.17 5.28 1.82 0.27 0.49 1000 Sector

N.Hu. (1) Burning Ghat/burial. Ground improvemne;i . (2) Kheya Ghat Improvement.

(3) Improvu;nenL Tatnks.

(4) SlaUtlIber Iluuse Improvements.

I * I. MDP APPRAISAL SURVEY: LOCAL ROAD IMPROVEMENT & STREET LIGHTING

Mletalled Rd. Brick Paved Rd. Black Tropped Rd Concrete Rd. Muddy Rd. Total Rd. N.o Ndme of Corporation Ex St- propo- Exist- Propo- Exist- Propo- exist- Prop.- Exist- Propo- Exist- Propo- Street EWS Municipality/ Investment ing ined ing sed ingj sed inig osed ing sed ing sed lights Target of TarCte Notified Area (Rs.Lakhs) (kmn) (km)n ) (kin mi) (kmn) (km) (kmn) (km) (km) (kin) (ki.) Jks) 1Proposned Population Population 2 31 4) 5 6 7 0 9 10) I I 1. .aeuttaMin. Qxcp 50.00 ------N-A. - 2. 11s"r'9 Kmz. Qxp. ------). Smith a-hban. 1..60 128.50 162.00 98.50 98.50 - - - - 32.50 - 260.50 260.50 1SO 600,000 66.51 4. Olitpara 94.77 84.33 102.33 12.50 24.00 - - - - 57,00 21.50 1M. 83 153.83 700 300,000 75.0 Jaw: 038 NA 15:00 N.A.. 10:00 N:.A. 16.50 N:.A. N.A. N.A.. 300,000 60.0 7. &'.ztt fl-n DMi 90.00 22.00 55. 00 60.00 71.00 55.00 60.00 - - 55.00 - 192.00 192.00 - 300,000 40.0 a. Pihaitt 60.75 100.00 110.00 70.00 82.00 - - - - 30.00 8.00 200.00 200.00 - 282,500 60.0 9. Gaa:&rn Ptch 112.70 33.04 39.83 21.63 40.67 - - - - 34.50 8.69 89.17 89,17 - 250,000 60.0 10. Bmrrmwaa 138.40 78.00 10.00 10.00 15.00 - - - - 30.00 - 121.00 12.00 - 180,000 80.0 nl. Beluy 45.00 31.25 67.61 8.02 14.69 30.36 - - - 8.61 2.00 84.30 84.30 - 200,000 75.0 12. 'Ubkec La 86.00 27.00 35.00 60.02 104.00 - - - - 163.00) 11.1.00 250.00 250.00 - 150,000 60.0 13, DMqyChIinsurah 59.59 90.00 90.00 32.00 61.50 60.00 60.00 0.20 0.20 40.00 4.50 222.20 222.70 450 125,000 85.0 14. 5nravcce 51.40 41.76 44.06 17.13 42.13 2.30 - - - 26.20 1.70 8-7.39 87.39 - 160,000 60.0 15. Wahati 7.45 V1.-CO 23.50 9.00 13.88 - - - - 8.38 2.00 39.38 39.38 - 140.000 60.0 L 16. BArradc0nX* 25.00 79.00 54.00 63.00 - 1.00 1.00 45.00 29.00 172.00 172.00 500 135,000 48.0 17. TiL7ttyI 17.00 .I 27.60 4.00 - ~ 5.10 - - - 13.60 9.90 42.60 42.60 58 125,000 85.0 1a. QWaIernagar 37.80 1ii 85.00 10.00 - 15.60 - - - 20.00 4.40 105.00 1135.00 125 170, 000 40.0 19. North Berrajijxc 21.6 63.00 67.00 25.00 28.00 . - 50.00 45.00 140.00 140.00 - 90,000 65.0 20. Wrth line Duw 75.00 25.00 39.50 21.00 - 41.00 - 54.00 19.50 100.00 100.00 - 139,000 70.0 21. RI*hra 40.87 36.95 40.12 9.37 13.25 1.42 - - 10.27 4.64 58.01 58.01 460 120,000 60.0 22. Phlalsahar 34.51 40.24 41.74 8.25 31.99 - - - - 25.00 19.76 73.00 73.00 700 1-17,000 75.0 23. YaIIraEnvra 27.09 33.75 36.87 10.70 12.1 - - 0.50 0.75 9.35 4.58 54.30 54.30 400 130,000 40.0 24. (ttarpsra rotcnz 23.11 37.16 39.18 11.93 26.53 - - - - 18.12 1,50 61.21 67.21 - 100,000 40.0 25. BanoeiA 38.75 39.40 39.60 4.70 14.70 - - - - 13.40 3.20 51.50 57.50 377 104,000 76.0 26. C2unplwd 25.50 25.40 21.00 10.77 9.42 - - 13.61 15.11 1.75 - 51.53 51.53 600 100,000 60.0 27. fl14ald niti 25.00 20.20 21.50 14.80 32.30 1.30 - 0.10 0.10n 24.40 6.90 60.80 60.80 160 90,000 75.0 28. irndy an5le 57.34 21.32 21.52 15.38 12.64 - - 2.43 9.32 7.51 3.16 46.64 46.64 30 90,000 70.0 29. Girulia 12.71 36.00 39.50 10.62 8.12 - - - - 8.00 7.00 54.62 54.62 40 80,000 65.0 30. Bierainat 28.00 34.00 44.00 19.00 24.00 10.00 5.00 - - 10.00 - 73.00 73.00 - 70,000 65.0 31. anmLke..rL U1.0 32.00 37.20 13.00 11.43 - - 2.13 3.33 4.83 - 51.96 51.96 - 75,000 60.0 32. kw aaxrackixx 35.31 25.50 34.80 7.00 13.50 - - - - 30.50 14.70 63.00 63.00 700 65,000 60.0 33. )tjksx 28.21 68.00 74.50 6.50 10.50 3.50 - 0.50 1.00 9.50 2.00 881.00 88.00 325 60,000 64.0 34. DumeDii 43.09 82.00 33.00 6.60 60.00 - - - - 1.00 - 33.60 33.60 500 60,000 25.0 35. rxanmar 18.90 28.00 34.00 42.00 39.00 - - - - 45.00 42.00 115.00 115.00 - 45,000 79.0 36. Jliadah 25.07 16.00 16.00 25.00 27.00 19.00 22.00 - - 15.00 10.00 75.00 75.00 - 58,000 45.0 37. Bsrulpx 27.51 19.60 22.60 6.30 13.10 - - - - 14.00 4.20 39.90 39.90 N.?A. 40,000 75.0 38. Kalynnl N.A.?. 26.00 180.00 181.00 8.00 8.00 - - - - 1.00 NMU 189.00 199.00 148 70,000 30.0 39. Gaynads. MN.A.?. 19.76 25.00 32.25 1.5.00 16.50 - - - - 20.00 11.25 60.00 60.00 - 52,000 40.0

IQl:1,896.12 1,734.90 2,045.44 166.85 1,073.12 205.88 1163.5(3 20.41 30.81 954.83 411.56 3.6a.t.91 3,682.931 4,613 5,385,000 - - 58 -

MDP APPRAISAL SUMMARYY: DRAINAGE

Name of Corporation/ % of Population served by % EWS Municipality/ Investment Improved Drainage Target of Target- Notified Area (Rs. Lakhs) Existing Proposed Population Population

(1) (2) (3) (4) . (5) (6)

1. Calcutta Mun. Corp 300.00 75 100 3,423,000 45.0 2. Howrah - - - - 3. South Suburban 221.50 30 70 420,000 66.5 4. Bhatpara 69.24 60 80 240,000 75.0 5. Jadavpur 112.00 30 80 240,000 60.0 6. Ramarhati 105.00 60 90 248,400 60.0 7. South Dum Dum 102.99 55 75 225,000 40.0 8. Panihati 91.45 20 60 169,500 60.0 9. Garden Reach 44.73 40 60 150,000 60.0 10. Barranagar 64.00 30 30 144,000 80.0 11. Bally 55.64 30 70 140,000 75.0 12. Uluberia 12.00 13 30 46,800 60.0 13. Hooghly-Chinsurah 57.84 40 60 108,000 85.0 14. Serampore 50.74 40 60 96,000 60.0 15. Naihati 55.00 60 90 126,000 60.0 16. Barrackpore 67.42 30 60 81,000 48.0 17. Titagarh 54.40 30 60 75,000 85.0 18. Chandernagar 51.90 20 50 60,000 40.0 19. North Barrackpore 27.94 - 65 58,500 65.0 20. 20.00 40 60 83,500 70.0 21. Rishra 28.62 40 80 96,000 60.0 22. falisahar 78.58 15 90 105,300 75.0 23. Kancharapara 37.48 70 85 93,500 40.0 24. Uttarpara Kotrung 17.88 25 65 65,000 40.0 25. Bansberia 31.00 40 65 67,600 76.0 26. Champdani 19.00 60 100 100,000 60.0 27. Baidyabati 22.00 25 75 67,500 75.0 28. Budge Budge 14.59 30 60 54,000 70.0 29. Garulia 29.64 40 75 60,000 65.0 30. Barasat 19.00 40 70 65,000 65.0 31. Bhadreswar 6.00 31 60 45,000 60.0 32. New Barrackpore 29e80 25 60 39,000, 60.0 33. Rajpur 17.08 20 40 28,000 64.0 34. Dum Dum 16.58 75 100 60,000 25.0 35. Konnagar 43.30 35 60 36,000 79.0 36. Khardah 20.93 30 60 35,100 45.0 37. Baruipur 32.20 20 65 26,000 75.0 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 8.00 80 90 63,000 30.0 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 12.53 25 50 26,000 40.0

TOTAL: 2,048.00 7,266,700 - 59 -

MDP APPRAISAL SUMMARY: PARKS & PLAYGROUNDS

1ame of Corporation/ Municipality/ Investment Parks % EWS o Playgrounds Target Target Notified Area (Rs. Lakhs) Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Population Populat

(1) . (2) (3) (4) (5) 6) (7) (8) L. Calcutta Mun. Corp - - 2. Howrah - - - - - 3. - - South Suburban 22.25 N.A. 4. 2 N.A. 600,000 Bhatpara 10.00 15 66e5 45 NIL 2 300,000 75.0 5. Jadavpur 10.22 NIL 3. Kamarhati 12 10 18 300,000 60.0 15.00 2 5 1. South Dum 2 5 276,000 60.0 Dum 7.90 20 30 3. Panihati 12 12 300,000 40.0 15.56 2 ). 14 1 4 82,500 Garden Reach 1.35 NIL 60.0 .0. Barranagar 1 3 4 250,000 60.0 - - -. .1. Bally - - - 5.50 2 5 .2. Uluberia 2 5 200,000 75.0 - - 3. Hooghly-Chinsurah - - 2.70 4 12 4. Serampore 2 3 180,000 85.0 - - - - 5, Naihati 3.26 NIL 6. Barrackpore 4 1 1 140,000 60.0 1.13 2 4 7. Titagarh NIL NIL 135,000 48.0 2.00 NIL 2 8. Chandernagar NIL NIL 125,000 85.0 1.50 2 5 9. North Barrackpore 1 1 120,000 40.0 1.98 3 3 0. North Dum Dum 5 5 90,000 65.0 100 1 2 1. Rishra - 139,000 11.30 5 70.0 5 1 2 120,000 2. Halisahar - 60.0 3. Kancharapara - - - - 4.31 - 4. Uttarpara 3 7 110,000 40.0 Kotrung 1.45 3 5. Bansberia 4 7 7 100,000 40.0 - - - 6. Champdani - - - 10.50 NIL 5 7. Baidyabati 1 1 100,000 60.0 2.00 4 8 S. Budge Budge NIL NIL 90,000 75.0 1.80 2 2 9. Garulia 1 2 . 90,000 70.0 - J. Barasat - - - - 6.00 15 16 L. Bhadreswar 4 5 70,000 65.0 9.00 NIL 10 1 2. New Barrackpore 0.50 1 75,000 60.0 6 8 4 4 3. Rajpur 9.25 65,000 60.0 6 11 1 4 70,000 4. Dum Dum 3.13 64.0 7 9 1 2. 60,000 3. Konnagar 0.34 NIL 25.0 1 NIL 1 60,000 79.0 3. Khardah 0.67 2 7. Baruipur 2 1 1 58,500 45.0 2.45 NIL 7 NIL 3. Kalyani N.A.A. 1 40,000 75.0 4.00 80 80 NIL GayeshpurG. N.A.A. 2 70,000 30.0 2.68 NIL 3 8 8 52,000 40.0 TOTAL: 170.73 183 317 72 108 14,469,000 - 60 -

MDP APPRAISAL SURVEY: MARKETS

Name of Corporation/ Municipality/ Inves tment Notified Area(R.Lks

(1) (2) 1. Calcutta Mun. Corp. 2. Howrah 3. South Suburban 25.40 4. Bhatpara 5.19 5. Jadavpur 19.71 6. Kamarhati 45.00 7. South Dum Dum 16.00 8. Panihati 20.82 9. Garden Reach 19.24 10. Barranagar 20.00 11. Bally 13.12 12. Uluberia 10.00 13. Hooghly-Chinsurah 15.50 14. Serampore 2.00 15. Naihati 21.60 16. Barrackpore 3.37 17. Titagarh 7.0 18. Chandernagar 10.00 19. North Barrackpore 3.68 20. North Dum Dum 13.00 21. Rishra 10.13 22. Halisahar - 23. Kancharapara 34.96 24. Uttarpara Kotrung 27.61 25. Bansberia 14.41 26. Champdani 15.00 27. Baidyabati 28. Budge Budge 10 .00 29. Garulia - 30. Barasat 15.00 31. Bhadreswar 15.00 32. New Barrackpore 10.00 33. Rajpur 10.73 34. Dum Dum 35. Konnagar 8.10 36. Khardah - 37. Baruipur 28.82 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 21.00 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 4.86

TOTAL: 496.25 -61-

MDP APPRAISAL SUMMARY: CONVERSION OF SERVICE PRIVIES INTO SANITARY LATRINES

Name of Corporation/ % Municipality/ Investment No. Currently No. to be Conversion Target Notified Area (Rs. Lakhs) Unconverted Converted of Total Population (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1. Calcutta Corp. Mun. - - - - 2. Howrah - 259.20 10,000 10,000 100 80,000 3. South Suburban 10.10 2,000 1,425 71 7,000 4. Bhatpara 26.00 1,500 1,500 100 12,000 5. Jadavpur 24.30 1,500 1,500 100 12,000 6. Kamarhati 17.00 1,364 1,364 100 10,500 7. South Dum Dum 26.00 2,000 1,200 60 9,600 8. Panihati 10.26 950 950 100 8,000 9. Garden Reach 47.45 3,586 2,250 63 18,000 10. Barranagar 16.00 1,600 1,600 100 12,800 11. Bally 40.00 3,000 2,200 73 17,600 12. Uluberia 20.00 1,000 1,000 100 8,000 13. Hooghly-Chinsurah 40.98 5,000 3,152 63 17,000 14. Serampore 22.05 4,482 1,200 27 15. Naihati 9,600 27.15 1,500 1,500 100 12,000 16. Barrackpore 16.67 850 800 94 6,400 17. Titagarh 15.00 424 424 100 3,000 18. Chandernagar 32.00 5,000 1,800 36 14,000 19. North Barrackpore 40.50 1,996 1,500 95 12,000 20. North Dum Dum 4.00 700 400 57 21. Rishra 2,400 13.77 850 850 100 6,800 22. Halisahar 16.20 1,000 1,000 100 7,000 23. Kancharapara 16.74 1,000 800 80 6,400 24. Uttarpara Kotrung - 34.35 1,970 1,542 78 11,000 25. Bansberia 11.00 1,422 916 64 7,200 26. Champdani 12.50 500 500 100 3,000 27. Baidyabati 21.00 1,600 1,300 81 11,000 28. Budge Budge 6.87 510 510 100 4,000 29. Garulia 13.36 850 825 97 6,600 30. Barasat 2.50 NIL 250 100 1,500 31. Bhadreswar 5.00 416 416 100 3,500 32. New Barrackpore 2.00 250 200 80 1,600 33. Rajpur 10.13 700 592 85 4,700 34. Dum Dum . 2.88 187 187 100 35. Konnagar 1,500 6.75 300 300 100 1,800 36. Khardah 10.80 520 520 100 37. Baruipur 4,100 4.13 650 340 52 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 2,000 - - - - 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 4.05 250 200 80 1,500 TOTAL: 888.69 61,427 26,800 3,571,100 - 62 -

MDP APPRAISAL SURVEY BUSTEE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMME (BIP)

Name of Corporation/ Municipality/ Investment Target Notified Area (Rs. Lakhs) Population

(1) (2) (3) 1. Calcutta Mun. Corp- 300.00 65,000 2. Howrah 340.80 115,000 3. South Suburban 21.50 20,000 4. Bhatpara 34.95 30,000 5. Jadavpur 23.00 5,500 6- Kamarhati 13.00 4,000 7. South Dum Dum 27.00 7,000 8. Panihati 43.72 80,000 9. Garden Reach 88.01 35,000 10. Barranagar 16.00 10,000 11. Bally 13.50 7,000 12. Uluberia 50.00 20,000 1.3. Hooghly-Chinsurah 3.62 5,000 14. Serampore - - 15. Naihati 30.39 10,000 16. Barrackpore 6.06 6,000 17. Titagarh 33.50 9,500 18. Chandernagar 12.00 10,000 19. North Barrackpore 5.61 4,140 20. North Dum Dum 5.00 1,400 21. Rishra 9.05 12,300 22. Halisahar 4.10 2,000 23. Kancharapara 11.62 4,500 24. Uttarpara Kotrung - - 25. Bansberia 4.73 7,000 26. Champdani 7.00 29,000 27. Baidyabati - 28. Budge Budge 17.00 10,000 29. Garulia 16.20 7,500 30. Barasat 2.00 30,00 31. Bhadreswar 27.00 23,000 32. New Barrackpore 33. Rajpur 2.47 5,000 34. Dum Dum 10.18 4,000 35. Konnagar 6.75 2,000 36. Khardah 4.05 1,550 37. Baruipur 4.58 3,000 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 8.00 8,720 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 8.82 5,800 TOTAL: 1f,241.21 1 594,910 MDP APPRAISAL SUMMARY: SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

- - .-- Tonnage Col lection. Col lection t'etric Efficiency lU Additional Name of Corporations Togs) Tonnale 8EWS municipalilky/ Investment Collection Target of Target *Jotified Area (Rs. Lakhs) Existing Proposed Existing Proposed (lMtric ins) Population Population

(2) -2 -3 4 5 - 6) 8 1. Calcutta Mun. Corp. 200 00t 1,400.0 2,000.0 70.00 100.00 600.0 3,423,000 45.0 2. Ilowrah ; *2 - - - - - 3. South Suburban 40.50 20.0 80.0 10.00 27.00 60.0 600,000 4. Bhatpara 66.5 21.82 124.0 145.0 83.00 83.00 21.0 300,000 5. Jadavpur 75.0 16.77 12.0 36.0 12.00 30.00 24.0 300,000 6. Kamarhatl 60.0 39.00 22.0 90.0 23.00 80.00 68.0 276,000 60.0 7. South Dum Dum 20.25 9.0 36.0 9.90 30.00 27.0 a. Panihati 300,000 40.0 18.44 - - - - - 282,000 60.0 9. Garden Reach 6.13 30.0 60.0 43.00 60.00 30.0 250,000 60.0 10. Barranagar 15.60 15.0 30.0 60.00 100.00 15.0 180,000 80.0 11. Bally 23.50 9.0 35.0 28.00 54.00 26.0 200,000 12. Uluberla 75.0 11.00 - 10.0 - 22.00 - 156,000 13. Hooghly-Chinsurah 60.0 21.50 19.5 60.0 30.00 60.00 40.5 180,000 14. B5.0 Serampore 1.50 15.0 30.0 30.00 46.00 15.0 160,000 15. Naihati 60.0 15.08 7.5 12 16.33 22.00 4.5 140,000 60.0 16. Barrackpore 8.57 15.0 27.0 37.50 57.00 12.0 135,000 17. Titagarh 48. 15.00 20.0 27.0 48.00 54.00 7.0 125,000 85.0 18. Chandernagar 3.75 35.0 50.0 70.00 83.00 15.0 120,000 40.0 19. North Barrackpore 4.54 20.0 35.0 66.00 70.00 15.0 90,000 65.0 20. North Dum Dum 4.50 3.0 15.0 10.00 36.00 12.0 139,000 70.0 21. Rishra 21.69 19.5 43.0 60.00 86.00 23.5 22. Halisahar 120,000 60.0 - - - - - 23. Kancharapara 10.06 5.5 11.2 29.33 49.78 5.7 110,000 40.0 24. Uttarpara Kotrung 9.52 9.0 26.0 26.00 73.00 20.0 100,000 25. Banaberia 40.0 6.00 14.0 20.0 58.00 63.00 6.0 104,000 76.0 26. Champdati 11.50 5.0 20.0 25.00 50.00 15.0 100,000 60.0 27. Baidyabati 2.00 15.0 21.0 62.00 66.00 .6.0 90,000 28. Budge 75.0 Budge - - - - - 29. Garulia 4.30 7.0 14.0 28.00 40.00 7.0 80,000 30. Barasat 65.0 6.00 4.5 9.0 14.00 18.00 4.5 70,000 65.0 31. Bhadreswar 5.00 30.0 70.0 60.00 100.00 40.0 75,000 60.0 32. New Barrackpore 2.39 2.0 10.0 20.00 50.00 8.0 65,000 60.0 33. Rajpur 5.05 5.3 15.0 66.00 100.00 9.7 70,000 65.0 34. Dum Dum 7.36 8.0 15.0 80.00 100.00 7.0 60,000 25.0 35. Konnagar 5.40 3.0 8.0 12.50 30.00 5.0 60,000 77.0 36. Khardah 9.45 9.0 14.0 75.00 78.00 5.0 58,000 45.0 37. Baruipur 1.28 10.0 20.0 67.00 50.00. 10.0 40,000 15.0 38. Kalyani N.A.A. 4.00 9.0 25.0 56.00 83.00 16.0 70,000 30.0 39. Gayeshpur N.A.A. 4.51 2.0 15.0 25.00 60.00 13.0 52,000 40.0 TOTAL: 599.96 1,883.8 3,137.2 '193.4 13,207,000

NB.. LI In addition to Rs. 200.00 lakhs under the MDP, the CMDA proposes to invest another Rs. 500.00 lakhs under CODP-III.

2 Urnder the Centrally - planned projects, CMPA proposes to invest Rs. 200.00 lakhs on SWM in ilowrah City.

I. ADDITIONAL STAFF REQUIREMENTS FOR MDP IMPLEMENTATION ANNEX 3

Class Distribution of Average Annual capital outlay under CUDP-IIt Group (Ra. Lakhsl Name of Municipalities EnLgineer Overseer Accounts Purchase Stores Others' Total

I Upto 20 KhardAh, Barasat, New Sarrackpore, Dum DuI, Rajpur, Baculpur, 1 1 l 2 7 Bhadceawac, Konnagar, Gayeshput N.K.A., Ealyani N.A.A.

II 21-40 , llalLuahar, Naihati, Garulla, North Dum Duu, Budge Budge, Bansberia, Chandernagar, 1 2 1 1 2 2 9 Champdanl, Daidyabatt, Rishra, Uttarpara - Kotrung.

III 41-60 Daranagar, Hooghly- Chinsurah, Serampore, 2 3 2 2 2 2 13 Bally, Uluberia.

IV 61-80 Bhatpara, Panihati, South Dum Dum, Garden 2 4 2 2 2 3 iS Reach, Jadavpur.

HIowrat Nunicipal Corp. wlth an average annual capital outlay of Rs.140 2 4 2 2 2 3 15 lakhs.

South SuburbaWIwith an average annual capital 3 5 - - - - 8 outlay of Rs. 130 lakhs.

Total additional Staff (other than Executive, Finance & llealth officers 52 88 49 49 64 9l 383 requirement for MDP.

[I The staff requiremnent of Ilowrah & SouthSuburban have been shown separately, since these do not belong to the classified groups by average annual capital outlay.

£2 "Others" categaries include staff such as nigilLwatchnan for stores, technical assistant clerks,.

M.D. (i) The Calcutta Municipal Corporation does not require any additional staff for the inplementation of the HDP. - 65 -

ANNEX 4

GUIDELINES FOR PREPARATION OF ESTIMATES

All estimates are to be submitted to the respective Zonal Co-Ordinating and Monitoring Centres, (with the exception of the Calcutta Corporation which submits its ward level scheme estimates to the Deputy Director at MDP headquarters in triplicate). The estimate for each scheme should be drawn separately and each estimate should consist of four components namely: a) Synoptic report b) Estimate report c) Schedule of items d) Plans and drawings. a) Synoptic Report

The Synoptic Report will provide the information necessary for processng and monitoring each estimate. All items may not be relevant to a particular estimate and items not applicable may be excluded from the report. b) Estimate Report

The report of the estimate will consist of general and salient information relating to the identification, nature and need of the scheme. c) Schedule of Items

Estimates should be drawn as per the latest schedule of rates of Public Works Department (Govt. of West Bengal). While preparing estimates for water supply schemes, if a particular item of work is not available in the Building/Sanitary Schedule of rates, the latest schedule of rate of Water Supply and Environmental Hygiene Sector, CMDA may be followed. An analysis should be furnished of rates of items which are not fully/partly available in the prescribed schedule of items of the Public Works Department.

5% (five percent) on cost of engineering work only will be admissible as contingency expenditure and may be provided for in the estimate. This will include all incidental expenditures relating to engineering work. Physical design standards for the programme must conform to the norms set at appraisal by AMEU.

All items should be quantified and unit rates should be given. Lump sum provisions should be avoided as far as practicable. - 66 -

Standard costs per unit for hand tube-wells, pit privies or privies with septic tanks and sanitary units with superstructure for converted privies may be estimated on the basis of the adopted schedule of rates. d) Plans and Drawings Plans and drawings to be enclosed with the estimates will consist of: i) A plan showing the location of the scheme on a municipal map or municipal ward map should be enclosed with the estimate. Where this is not possible, e.g. in the case of the installation of scattered hand tube-wells or sanitary latrines, the locational address of each installation should be listed and enclosed with the estimate. ii) In the case of road works, the length of the road proposed to be improved should be shown on a municipal/ward map. A typical cross-section of road surface and roadside drain showing existing conditions and improvement proposed must be provided. iii) In the case of surface or underground drains, the alignment of the drains proposed to be constructed or improved along with the out-fall is to be shown on a municipal/ ward map. iv) In the case of bustee improvement works, the boundary of the bustee must be clearly indicated on a municipal/ward map. One list showing existing and proposed facilities, hutment population, number of families per hut etc.; are to be provided with the estimate. v) Where relevant, building plans are to be furnished. Layout plans for works like markets, parks and playgrounds etc., are to be furnished. - 67 -

Estimates are to be furnished under the following.heads: a) Roads This sub-head will include roads and pathways and ancillary works such as road-side drains, street lights, road-side protection works, etc. While preparing the estintes of roads and pathways, consideration must be given to the existing sub-base. Specifications proposed for road works should be arrived at taking account of expected vehicular traffic of the road. Brick pavement is to be preferred to cement concrete pavement due to the scarcity of cement and future up-keep and maintenance problems.

b) Drainage

This will incude works related to surface drains of all categories, (not related to road works) and underground drains.

Cross sections of draitis and inter-ward drains must be estimated taking into account the catchment area they have to serve. The level of invert of the drains may carefully be examined with reference to level of the catchment area and out-fall of the drain.

c) Water Supply

This sub-head will include hand tube-wells, deep tube-wells, water conveyor systems, water reservoirs and other infrastructure related to water supply.

Asbestos pressure pipes of the appropriate size may be used for piped water supply under roads not used by heavy vehicular traffic. But C.I. pipes should be used for road crossings.

d) Conversion

This sub-head will include the work of converting in-sanitary latrines to sanitary privies with septic tanks, latrines, latrines connected to sewers or 'pit privies' including small drain lengths and/or sewers- required for discharging effluent. e) Bustee Improvement

This includes improvement works inside an identified bustee within the framework of the bustee improvement norms related to drainage, water supply, conversion of in-sanitary latrines, paving/metalling of pathways and roads, security lighting and also garbage vats and community bathing platforms. - 68 -

ANNEX 5 STANDARD FORMS FOR SUBMISSION OF ESTIMATE

(1) SYNOPTIC REPORT OF ESTIMATE

...... Municipality/Corporation.

1. Serial No. of Estimate sent by Municipality to ZCMC

2. Name of Scheme

3. Estimated Amount

4. Name-of Sub-head

5. Classification of schemes (inc. Commercial/Non-commercial this scheme) sent to ZCMC Rs ...... (Rupees...... 7. Total amount of AA & FS

received so far ...... ) 8. Cumulative value of schemes (inc. this scheme) sent to ZCMC RS ...... (Rupees ...... under this sub-head 1 ...... 9. Total amount of AA & FS received under this sub-head Rs ...... (Rupees ......

...... 000

Rs ...... (Rripees......

...... )against total provision of Rs...... ee ... (Rupees ...... in appraisal report0 lO. Physical provisions made in the estimate:

Black Top Road ...... M Watermain. of diameter 75mm and above. .e ...... e .... M Pavement ...... M Water Point ...... Nos. Street light ...... Nos. Hand tubewell ...... e...... Nos. Pucca surface drain...... M Deep tubewell ...... Nos. Brick lined drain¢.....¢.....1 Latrine: Katcha drain ...... M (a) With septic tank ...... Nos. Underaround drain ...... 4M (b) Sewer connected ...... Nos.

Market ...... Nos. (c) Pit Privy ...... Nos. - 69 -

Parks ...... e..... Nos. B.I. Work ... e.Population coverage. Cremation ground...... Nos. Others: Bathing ghat ...... Nos. ll. Approx. No. of beneficiaries: 12. Approx. cost of yearly maintenance.

Certified that no fund has been drawn or sanctioned against the subject work or part of it from the CtJDP-III allocation.

For surface or under-ground drains

Certified that the workability of the proposed drains/underground have been examined drains with reference to invert level of outfall and also with level of catchment area. For Road and Pavement Works

Certified that the roand/pavement proposed to be will improved under the scheme not be disturbed within CUDP-111 period except for and all foreseeable emergency purpose underground services would be completed befoce up the road/pavement work;- taking.

Signature (Name ...... Mayor/President/Chairman/ Administrator

...... Municipality/Corporation

(Signature of (Official seal Municipal Engineer) with designation)

N.B. 1. This form duly filled up will form a part of 2. Items estimate. not applicable to a particular scheme may be omitted - 70 -

(2) REPORT OF ESTIMATE

1. Name of scheme 2. Name of Sub-head

3. Location (a) Ward/Wards (b) Boundary (c) Identification in enclosed .Plan

4. Estimated Amount

4.1 Land acquisition Rs ......

4.2 Equipment Rs ......

4.3 Engineering work Rs ..e...... *......

(a) Civil Works

(i) Materials Rs ......

(ii) Labour Rs ......

Total (i+ii)Rs__ (iii)Contingency 0 5% over item 'a' above Rs ......

(b) i) Mechanical works Rs ......

(ii) Contingency @ 5% over item "bw Rs ......

(c) (i) Electrical works Rs ......

(ii) Contingency @ 5% over item "cm Rss......

4.4 Cost of rehabilitation! re-location etc. Rs......

4.5 Miscellaneous Rs ......

Total estimated Rs......

5. Schedule followed: Latest P.W.D. Schedule of Rates for the year

6. Objective of the scheme

7. Specification followed - 71 -

8. Name of the consultant if so engaged

8.1 If so, brief detail of work awarded

9. Approx. no. of beneficiaries 10. Land/Property Status (a) Approx. area of land/property required for:

(i) Implementation of the scheme

(ii) Rehabiliation/re-location of people affected by the scheme (b) Whether land/property is owned by the Municipality: (c) Whether acquisition is necessary: If yes, the following particulars must be furnished: (i) Area of land to be acquired ...... Acre (Shown in enclosed plan) (ii) Approx. cost of land Rs ...... (iii)Present status of acquisition ...... (iv) Expected date of land acquisition...... 11. Expected date from which the Municipality work will be ready to commence

12. Expected time period for implementation ...... months. 13. Expected year-wise expenditure forcast Year Expected expenditure Remarks 1983-84 Rs ...... *......

1984-85 Rs...... 1985-86 Rs ......

1986-87 Rs ......

1987-88 Rs......

14. Whether assistance required for procurement of materials. - 72 -

15. Expected year-wise requirement of materials. Steel (diameter C.I. Pipe Year wire) (dia wise) Cement Bitumen 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88

16. Annual icost of maintenance and operation of the assets after work is complete. (a) Fixed charges (i) Power/fuel (ii) Labour

(b) Others ......

Total: _ 17. Expected financial return/revenue, if any, from the assets created. 18. Special comments, if any

...... * ...... Signature ...... (Signature of Municipal Engineer) Name ...... ee... e e ¢ e Mayor/President/Chai rman/ Administrator

...... * .. Municipality/ Corporation

(Office seal with designation)

N.B. (1) This form duly filled up will form a oart of esl;ms*¢ - 73 -

(3) SCHEDULE OF ITEMS

** -- ec*eeeee...... *e...... Municipality/Corporation Name of Work

Name of Sub-head

Reference of schedule/s followed with reference to year Description of items with page no. and item S1. reference of the No. Amount schedule/analysis Unit Quantity Rate/Unit (4)-(5) 1 2 3 4 5 6

C.O. Total s ......

Total Rs......

(Rupees ...... * Countersigned

Signature .e ...... * * o . .e e * Signature ...... (Name in full) Municipal Engineer-in-charge (Nam.e *...... cc...... e) Mayor/Pres ident/Chairman/ (Official seal with designation) (Official seal with designation) Administrator - 74 -

(4) SUPPORTING PLANS AND DRAWINGS

...... Municipality/Corporation

Present Scheme Status of the Municipality 1. Total provision made in the appraisal Rs...... 2. Same for the Sub-head Rs......

3. Value of AA & FS so far received Rs ......

4. Same for the sub-head Rs......

S. Value of estimates sent to Director but AA & FS not received Rs ...... 6. Same for the sub-head Rs ......

The following scheme/s are hereby placed in the ...... meeting of the RMWC/HWC to be held on ...... for consideration:

S1. Estimated No. Name of Scheme Sub-head Value Remarks

- , . . ., , i . . .-- - - 75

Deviations, if any, regarding: (a) Plans and drawing - (for S1. No O...... ) (b) Item of rates or analysis of rates - (for SI. No ...... ) (C) Others (from standard guidelines): (for Si. No ...... )

Observa tions:

Dy. Director, R.C.M.C. Eas t/West

For estimated work at Rs. 100,000/-_and above

Memo No ...... Dated ......

Forwarded to Deputy Director (Headquarters) with estimates (each in triplicate) for placing in the meeting of MWC.

Dy. Director, R.C.M.C East/West - 76 -

ANNEX 6

BI:BLIOGRAPEY

1. GOWB

Municipal Finance Commission Report, March 1982 2. Legislation

The Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 1970 The West Bengal Town and Country (Planning and Development) Act 1979 The Bengal Municipal Act 1982 and Amendments 1980 The West Bengal Central Valuation Board Act 1978 The Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act 1980 The Howrah Municipal Corporation Act 1980 The Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act 1981 The West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1956 The West Bengal Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act 1971 The Calcutta Metropolitan Water and Sanitation Authority Act 1966 The Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act and Rules, 1976 The Calcutta Improvement Act 1911 The Howrah Improvement Act 1956 3. Consultants' Reports

Planning in the Calcutta Metropolitan Districts - H. Richardson 1980 Institutional Aspects and Training in the CMD - B. D'Souza 1980 Public Finance Situation in the CMD - E. Bachrach 1981 Forward Planning Process in the CMD - C. Turner 1981

4. C4DA

Perspective Plan and Action Program for the CMD (Draft) 1981. Development Perspective for the CMD 1982 5. IDA

Project Performance Audit Memorandum, dated 6/82 (Cr 427-IN, 73/74-79/8 Staff Appraisal Report India Third Calcutta Urban Project, dated 2/5./3 77 -

(4) SUPPORTING PLANS AND DRAWINGS

...... Municipali.ty/Corporation

?cesent Scheme Status of the Municivalitv

1. Total provision made in the appraisal Rs ......

2. Same for the Sub-head Rs......

3. Value of AA & FS so far received Rs ......

4. Same for the sub-head Rs ...... 5. Value of estimates sent to Director but AA & FS not received Rs ...... 6 Same for the sub-head Rs ......

The following scheme/s are hereby placed in the ......

meeting of the RMWC/HWC to be held on...... for consideration:

S..' Estimated No. Name of Scheme Sub-head Value Remarks

I' * - ,I. . - 78 -

Deviations, if any, regarding: (a) Plans and drawing (for Si. No ...... ) (b) Item of rates or analysis of rates - (for S1. No ...... ) (c) Others (from standard guidelines): (for Si. No ...... )

Observations:

Dy. Director, R.C.M.C. East/West

For estimated work at Rs. 100,000/- and above

Memo No ...... Dated ......

Forwarded to Deputy Director (Headquarters) with estimates (each in triplicate) for placing in the meeting of MWC.

Dy. Director, R.C.M.C East/West