Budget yes without happy ending

What project is worthy of credit financing? What is mandatory and what is optional? And what is political style anyway? Even in the aftermath, the council is quick to stick to the basics – and remains divided on all these core issues. The fact that the second vote on the 2018 budget nevertheless ends positively with 10:9 votes has more to do with the current faction strengths than with successful persuasion work: the SPD and the new list insist emphatically on a no vote and continue to be supported by one vote from the burger block.

For example, shifting investments from 2018 to 2019 and 2020, or future reserve formation from fees and improvement contributions: because the investment plan updated by the administration "does not contain any material changes, only shifts" christian beickert (SPD) wanted to remove the new vote from the agenda right at the beginning. The new circumstances required by the paragraph are no justification for a new vote.

Burgermeister sees blockade

Mayor wolfgang desel, on the other hand, reaffirms his changes and justifies the preservation of the basic line of the draft budget with four previous consultations that went through without requests for changes – and he criticizes the late refusal in the first vote: after all, "the criticized area of the budget is based on joint decisions, which logically contain uncertainty factors".

Desel sees a renewed non-agreement as a blockade and fears considerable delays in the implementation of various projects. "We do not adopt a budget 2019 or an investment plan 2020, but appropriations 2018. This is about services of general interest."

Development or luxury?

The narrow rejection of the motion to strike off the budget acts as a starting signal for renewed debate. In addition to the concerns already formulated in the june meeting about the additional costs of the kindergarten renovation project in geisfeld, the SPD is very quickly on the actual neuralgic point: council member christian beickert describes the planning of the new IGZ multigenerational house as completely exaggerated. In his opinion, the so-called lighthouse project is now estimated at 13 million and such a thing is not an obligatory task, but simply too coarse. It is not a question of "if, but about the "how": "the municipal share will not work out, the investment plan is blue-eyed – and we lack faith"."

The criticism is supported by the new list: "of course, the IGZ should be built. But it is about the dimensions." "he who does not say A, does not have to say B". Responds andreas kehl to the mayor’s demand and refers to the mixed result of the vote on the new construction of the integrative community center in june 2017.

The demand of the SPD to continue to use the interim building directly as a new address and thus save on the new building is rejected by municipal manager arnold engert: "according to the needs assessment, this is not a lack of perspective due to the square meterage." but of course people are thinking about how the transitional building on the former kachelmann site can continue to be put to good use.

Philipp sporlein (CSU) sees the IGZ as a joint idea with the already completed town hall renovation and as an overall project for urban development "and it is also eligible for subsidies". According to mayor desel, it is always suggested that "we, the municipality, are the cost bearer of the entire project. And that is simply not true". In fact, the cost estimate is eleven million euros, of which the awo will have to contribute three million.

"Always just talk"

Irene loch (CSU) responds to the SPD’s and the new list’s refusal in june with an excursion into the even more distant past – and with a verbal frontal attack. "The former mayor of the SPD has always made nice speeches about how well we are doing and how low the per capita debt is. He has carried this before him like a monstrance." because of lethargic action, lost eyesight and economic indifference, investments have failed to materialize "and others have to make the soup". Today, the SPD and the new list are focused on putting the blame on others and have been pursuing a policy of prevention and blockade for the last four years. Hole: "if you had done your job right, there were not millions in construction costs." in her appeal she calls the IGZ an overall project for all citizens and asks for political understanding and serious factual politics: "let’s work together in a cross-factional, solution-oriented way."

With all the sympathy for "political scharmutzel" andreas kehl (new list) pleads for more objectivity and signals willingness to cooperate despite rejection of the budget: "for joint cross-factional solution-oriented work: very gladly. In the last meeting, we even submitted a motion for an extra budget committee." christian beickert (SPD) also recalls the numerically strong CSU during the SPD’s four-year period of government "the CSU supported all decisions at that time" – and therefore asks for a different way of dealing with them: "you are right about many things, but the tone is completely out of line."

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: