Is serious public participation even possible in the Kongresshaus question despite the pandemic?
The majority of the Garmisch-Partenkirchen municipal council thinks: Yes - and rejected the FDP application, which aimed to postpone the whole thing.
However, the date for the announced request for a council will probably be delayed.
Garmisch-Partenkirchen
- The disputes in Garmisch-Partenkirchen's municipal council are not for the faint of heart.
Michael Gerber needed a particularly thick skin in the most recent meeting on Thursday evening.
Martin Sielmann (FDP) and Lilian Edenhofer (Free Voters) literally cross-examined the managing director of GaPa Tourismus GmbH, who answered questions about the long-running congress center, and covered him with criticism.
Green councilor complains of "Gerber bashing"
At some point this became too much for Alexandra Roos-Teitscheid.
The Green politician complained about "tanner bashing" and stood protectively in front of the tourism boss: "I think what's going on here is really bad," she said.
The cause of the exchange of blows - Sielmann had submitted an application in the matter - the councilor described as "populist".
What was it about?
The FDP man pleaded for the already initiated public participation on the controversial topic of the Congress House to be suspended until the lockdown is lifted.
The reason: Sielmann misses equal opportunities.
At the moment, he argued, it was almost impossible for an initiative to collect signatures, meet and initiate a referendum.
“That is deeply undemocratic,” complained the liberal.
In his opinion, the decision from 2019 will simply be ignored.
At that time, as is well known, a clear majority was in favor of maintaining the community-owned, aging property (operator is GaPa Tourismus) including renovation and partially new construction.
The new building study presented at the beginning of this year by the project developer Hinterschwepfinger commissioned by GaPa Tourismus was again in the line of fire.
If the process was open-ended, why was such a concrete concept drawn up, Edenhofer wanted to know.
It is about providing an impulse not only to think about the building on Richard-Strauss-Platz, but also about the entire location, explained Gerber.
“This is not a built reality.” And, according to him, the whole thing should not be a campaign for new buildings.
Rather, there are two questions in the room: “What should the place achieve?
And how can he do it? "
Mayor Elisabeth Koch (CSU) took the same line.
The question of whether it's going to be a renovation or a new building has not yet been asked.
"We are at the very beginning," said the town hall chief - and spoke of a "decision-making process".
In the end, Sielmann did not find a majority for his concern.
Only Edenhofer took his side.
After a lengthy and controversial debate, the large majority of the plenary decided to continue on the course taken despite the Corona crisis.
Citizens' participation has already started with a survey which, in addition to the topic of the congress center, also deals with the local tourism acceptance.
The response was good, reported Gerber.
So far, more than 1000 people have made their statements.
Other formats such as workshops, to which representatives of the citizens' initiative “Save our Congress House” are invited, site inspections and an online participation platform are to follow.
Date for requests for advice will probably be postponed
At the end there should be a request for advice.
Originally, the day of the federal election on September 26 was discussed.
But this appointment will probably not be able to be kept, as Koch and Gerber revealed in the meeting.
It was "recognizable", explained the tourism boss, that the question for the request for the council had then been determined "at most".
Anton Hofer (Garmisch + Partenkirchen together) suggested that the vote might not be held until next year in order to give a citizens' initiative enough time.
Because: "The effort is immensely high."
Getting the Garmisch-Partenkirchner on board met with broad approval.
For example, Claus Froerer (CSU) spoke of a “completely transparent process” - and added: “We will accept the citizens' yes or no”.
Stephan Thiel (Greens) said: "This is the right way." And Michael Simon (SPD) said: "We take the people with us."
