Megapolis Chennai: The Mamdani model

CHENNAI: Imagine Prime Minister Narendra Modi campaigning for (or against) a person contesting as the Mayor of Chennai. It may sound ridiculous but that precisely is what happened in the United States where Donald Trump, who occupies what many Americans consider to be most powerful positions of the world, railed against the eventual winner, Zohran Mamdani.

For those of us living thousands of kilometres away in Chennai, this high-profile political battle highlighted something else: the powers that the Mayor of New York enjoys. The city employs a whopping three lakh staff, has a budget of $120 billion, and a GDP of $1.3 lakh crore. New York Mayor has the powers to appoint or remove commissioners of police, fire department, Transit Authority, and about three dozen other agencies; oversees boards and commissions, including Housing Development Corporation; can even appoint judges.

Chennai, however, seems to be ambling on a different path. Even as it expanded in size, population and complexity, its governance structure remains trapped in an older era. Power is scattered across multiple agencies, most of which report not to the Mayor but to different State departments. The result is a city where responsibilities overlap and hence accountability diffuses. Together, they run a ‘Greater Chennai’, which has ‘great’ in its name but is only an agglomeration of municipalities stitched together by coordination meetings.

The megapolis that we dream of cannot be run by a Mayor who has to manage this collection of administrative units. For that, we need a Mayor whose power and profile matches that of the city she/he is governing. One who has executive authority over the whole metropolitan region; one who is directly elected so that the power is derived from democratic legitimacy. This is a structural reform in the governance apparatus that could better address the pressures of urban density, mobility, water security, housing demand, economic competition, and climate change in the decades ahead.

Today, Chennai’s civic structure is fractured by design. The Greater Chennai Corporation is responsible for core urban services, but the power to shape the city is dispersed far beyond its reach. The Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB or simply Metro Water) does not report to the Mayor but to the Municipal Administration Department Minister. The Traffic Police reports to the City Police Commissioner, who answers to the Home Minister. The CMDA, the planning authority for the whole, is controlled by a different minister. Major roads within city limits fall under the Highways Department. Stormwater drains and flood management are split across GCC and PWD. Even building plan approvals are divided: small projects with the Corporation, large ones with CMDA - separate hierarchies, different ministers, multiple bureaucracies.

In such a system, no one person or institution can shape a unified vision for the city. When a street floods, which agency is accountable? When buildings rise in low-lying zones, who bears responsibility? When traffic chokes, who leads corrective action? When new mobility or housing corridors are proposed, who integrates them with water, power, sanitation and public space? Chennai moves forward, but with each department pulling at a different pace.

Having a Metro Mayor corrects this at the root. It consolidates authority, responsibility and long-term planning under a democratically elected leader who has a mandate from the people, and the power to act.

It does look like concentration of power to one office. But that is a narrow view. The idea is not about power but about empowering a leader, who is entrusted with the responsibility to create an urban government worthy of the city it serves. It is also about accountability for governance failures.

When water, sanitation, mobility, traffic management, urban planning, public space development, traffic and local transport come under a single metropolitan government, decisions become faster, more coherent, and more aligned with long-term needs.

This does not mean bypassing State authority. Rather, it is about devolving appropriate powers to the city, as modern world cities have done. Examples are aplenty. London’s Mayor leads transport, policing oversight, and strategic planning. Paris’s Mayor transformed the city with its cycling revolution and pedestrian-first redesigns. The Mayor of Bogotá reshaped mobility with decisive governance. Similarly, Seoul, Tokyo, Singapore, and New York all have strong mayors with executive powers across metropolitan functions.

Chennai needs a similar leap, not because other cities have done it, but because the challenges ahead demand it. A fragmented structure cannot deliver integrated solutions. A Metro Mayor can.

For such a model to work, the leader must be directly elected by all voters in the city. Anything less lacks legitimacy and a councillor selected by her/his peers as the Mayor won’t have the same authority. Citizens must know that their Mayor is not handpicked by political bosses, that the post is not symbolic or dependent on bureaucratic hierarchies. They must have the confidence that the Mayor is the representative they chose and is hence accountable to them alone.

Direct elections also help sharpen accountability and create clear responsibility lines. The one who governs the city may take credit for improvements, but must answer for its failures. Just like a Chief Minister or the Prime Minister.

But while envisaging such a powerful Mayor, it is important to have built-in safeguards to ensure that it does not become an elected autocracy as we have seen in the case of strongmen leaders across the world.

There should be term limits; a strong, elected corporation council with real legislative authority; an independent metropolitan audit office; a mobility and planning regulator to ensure professional oversight; mandatory public consultations and open data laws; citizen assemblies for key decisions, etc.

Such a Mayor would have the power to lead, but the people will hold the leash to ensure that she/he does not lead them astray.