The Council authorizes Lüneburg’s treasurer to borrow an additional 15 million euros

Lunneburg. The discussions for the 2025 budget are just around the corner, and there will also be a demand for the views of the parliamentary groups for local policy priorities for 2026 in a few weeks. But before we look at the next two years, Matthias Rink has to focus on this financial year again. Because the city can’t make ends meet with the money. A supplementary budget is needed for the 2024 budget which was approved in December 2023. The majority of the council now gave the green light to the sitting room – mainly because the majority did not see another option.

Budget surplus or budget freeze, Rink had already created this simple formula in the Finance Committee. The city needs an additional 15 million euros to safely enter next year. The maximum level of liquidity loans, previously set at 145 million euros according to legislation, is not enough for the Hanseatic city to be solvent; the council has now raised the upper limit to 160 million euros. Representatives from various organizations made it clear that the treasurer was not to blame for the financial misery, but some nevertheless used the item on the table to say a few words of warning.

Alexander Schwake (CDU) spoke of a “worrying” situation: “Every other step is a step in the wrong direction.” To him, the numbers are a clear sign that “the time for mindless spending is over.” In his eyes, the Citizens’ Assembly is an example of an “absolutely unnecessary expense”. The town had estimated around 25,000 euros for the participation committee. Schwake said: “Our spending policy also sends a signal to citizens. We as the council are a role model here.” The CDU does not agree with the supplementary budget only because there is no other option at the moment, but they want it to be understood as an ultimatum.

Ulrich Blanck (Greens) agreed with Schwake that there was no alternative to the upcoming decision. “But that’s why you have to think about what speeches you want to give here. I think your comments are a bit over the top. As the reasons for the financial situation have nothing to do with very expensive projects in Lüneburg, we do not provide any luxury here, the situation is mainly caused by the fact that the adhere to the principle of connection. “The federal and state governments are overloading cities with more and more tasks, but they are not providing them with adequate financial resources.”

Frank Soldan (FDP) also saw himself without a real choice, asking: “What else is left but to agree so as not to risk liquidity?” He recalled the country’s several million euros in debt relief aid, which was used again after ten years. “We need to save and reduce our costs. A city cannot go bankrupt in Germany, but we are responsible for the future. We pay off loans by issuing new loans. Anyone who does this privately needs to have a different conversation with their bank than we do.”

Sören Köppen (Die Basis) believes that “it is high time to reconsider voluntary costs”. He also gave examples of projects for which funding is available. After all, this is tax money that the federal or state governments would get back elsewhere.

Everyone is urging people to save money, but hardly anyone is saying where

Mariannes Esders (Die Linke) looked to Berlin: “The debt bankruptcy at the federal level should be postponed, otherwise cities will have the same situation every year.”

Uwe Nehring (SPD) assessed the culprits of the misery in a similar way to Blanck: “There are gaps in coverage for day care places and refugee accommodation.” These are just the activities that the municipalities undertake, but they do not get the full costs reimbursed Yes, what can the council do? Nehring asked: “Do we really want to save money on workers?”

He left open where the SPD wanted to save, just as Soldan did for the FDP: To put it in perspective: When the city threw a company party for 20,000 euros from tax money a few weeks ago, there was no politicians have no problem with it.

LZ