



	Home About Contact Deutsch

Strategy of Opacity in the City Council – Were Citizen Questions About the IKIG Willfully Ignored Before the Vote Despite Ample Time?

On November 7, 2024, Mayor Martin Papke stated during the city council meeting that the response to Mr. Wolfgang Gotthelf’s extensive inquiry regarding the planned establishment of the IKIG special-purpose association (Intermunicipal Industrial Area) had indeed already been prepared but apparently was never forwarded to the questioner. Instead of clarifying these outstanding questions, the city council went ahead and voted on the creation of the IKIG association – without providing crucial information underpinning Mr. Gotthelf’s criticism to either the council members or the public.

This sequence raises serious questions about transparency and political culture in Weißenfels. It creates the impression that the response to the inquiry was deliberately withheld to avoid critical public discussion before the vote. Mr. Gotthelf’s questions concerned essential points such as a worst-case scenario for financial risks, possible cost overruns, and the sustainability of the city’s debt load if the IKIG project turns out to be a failed investment. These questions were not only ignored but apparently handled in a way that prevented the public and critical voices from having any opportunity to present well-founded objections ahead of the vote. Such conduct could be seen as an attempt to steamroll the decision through and downplay the project’s risks.

The approval of the association’s founding despite unanswered questions suggests that a majority in the city council was unwilling to seriously consider the citizens’ concerns. Instead, the decision appears to have been made recklessly despite unclear financial and infrastructural risks. The raised risks and concerns—especially regarding significant cost increases, dependence on subsidies, and future budget burdens—were apparently not sufficiently discussed. These failures point to a negligent handling of the citizens’ interests and trust.

It is also troubling that Mayor Papke seemingly did not clearly accept responsibility for the failure to forward the response to Mr. Gotthelf in a timely manner. A delayed forwarding of the reply effectively prevents critical questions from being raised during the citizen question time and open discussion about potential risks. These circumstances give rise to suspicion that Papke and the administration deliberately pursued a strategy of opacity to suppress resistance or at least critical questions. Such proceedings create the impression that citizens’ opinions and concerns were deliberately excluded to push the IKIG project through as smoothly as possible.

The behavior of Mayor Papke and the city council majority shows an alarming disregard for democratic principles and the importance of public debate in far-reaching local decisions. Trust in the integrity and transparency of the city administration and council is severely damaged by such conduct. A responsible handling of Weißenfels’ finances and future would have required a comprehensive discussion and, above all, clarification of the outstanding questions before making a decision. Instead, a consciously opaque strategy seems to have been pursued, disregarding citizens’ interests and informed participation.

The whole affair calls into question the seriousness with which Mayor Papke and the city council majority fulfill their democratic responsibility toward the citizens. Especially in a project that carries immense financial burdens and potential risks for the city, transparent and honest communication would have been indispensable. The fact that the open questions were not clarified before the vote points to a troubling understanding of democracy and a considerable disregard of citizen interests.

The video recording of the city council meeting, which also shows this part, had to be taken offline after a lawyer was involved by the council (the matter is under review – this will surely take some time). The recording also made it clear that the council members were fully aware that many aspects regarding the IKIG are completely unclear. Nevertheless, the IKIG resolutions were passed by majority vote.

Mr. Wolfgang Gotthelf’s Inquiry

Citizen Question Time, Weißenfels City Council, August 29, 2024; Questioner: Wolfgang Gotthelf, Borau

Inquiry regarding 1. findings from the feasibility study on IKIG, primarily as a very concerned citizen of Weißenfels

An initial analysis showed that the risks and challenges for Weißenfels stand in no proportion to any possible benefits.
The study assumes total (large-scale) costs of €141.24 million, with a side note warning that this applies to very large land parcels (clusters), i.e., for large industrial units. For smaller or much smaller parcels, the €141 million cannot be maintained.
Future price developments were not considered in the study; looking at large projects like Stuttgart 21 and BER, I don’t want to speak of tripling at the moment, but a doubling to around €300 million is realistic.
Regarding operating costs, maintenance of infrastructure, cleaning, security, and administration, there is only the alarming statement that these costs could at best be covered by fees and charges. Since trade tax revenues will only flow gradually, each participating municipality must reckon with very high financial burdens on their budgets for many years.

Specifically, I ask: Does the city of Weißenfels have a worst-case scenario for:

rapidly escalating financing and cost overruns
loss or reduction of subsidies
lack of demand, since competing sites like Leuna III, Zeitz-Tröglitz, or Wiedemar are significantly more attractive
unpredictable budget burdens from ongoing operating costs
social side costs such as new housing, schools, daycare centers, and medical care, which are hardly affordable at the current debt level
interest payments on existing loans that Weißenfels must service with new loans
the rough concept assumes full capacity of the Weißenfels sewage treatment plant; expansion costs and higher fees for all existing users must be expected
how Weißenfels plans to escape a vicious cycle of a self-created debt trap if the project is forced through against citizen resistance and common sense

Please provide a response from the city – your own worst-case assessment, and do not use the predictable response from the structural commission.

Author: AI-Translation - Michael Thurm | 09.11.2024

Jeden Tag neue Angebote bis zu 70 Prozent reduziert

Other articles:

Stupid fu... um... vote well!

How the CDU and CSU are abolishing transparency to continue uninterrupted.... zum Artikel

You’ve Done Everything Wrong in Parenting – You’ve Failed Miserably

Well, dear parents – you tried so hard. And that’s exactly what’s wrong.... zum Artikel

STOP zum Flächenfraß im BLK an B91/A9 - FÜR sinnvollen Strukturwandel - Petition gegen das IKIG (Interkommunale Industriegebiet)

Verantwortungslos und teuer! 450 Hektar fruchtbares Ackerland sollen versiegelt werden! Aufruf, online eine Petition zu unterzeichnen.... zum Artikel

Support the operation of this website with voluntary contributions:
via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/evovi/12

or via bank transfer
IBAN: IE55SUMU99036510275719
BIC: SUMUIE22XXX
Account holder: Michael Thurm

Shorts / Reels / Kurz-Clips Imprint / Disclaimer